legal news


Register | Forgot Password

MacKenzie v. Madden
Respondents R. Bruce and Louise MacKenzie and their neighbors, including appellants Joseph E. and Christy Madden, all have a private road easement incident to the ownership of their respective parcels. To protect against flooding from an adjacent creek and provide privacy to their road, respondents and a group of their neighbors placed a berm, rocks and hedges along the outer edge of the parcel of property owned by appellants, who live on the other side of the creek and reach their residence from a different road. Appellants did not approve of the changes and litigation ensued. Following a three-day bench trial that included a visit to the site, the trial court found the improvements were a proper exercise of respondents' rights and duties under a right-of-way easement and accordingly entered judgment in their favor. Appellants contend the court's ruling is legally and factually erroneous. We affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale