A driftway across the defendant's land was created by grant, giving the plaintiff his only access to the highway. The need for a way having ceased, it had not been used by the dominant owner for about twenty-five years, and in places was so overgrown as to be almost impassable. Moreover, the defendant moved two buildings in the line of the way, and about five years previously had prevented the plaintiff from cutting brush within its bounds. The lower court held that these facts constituted an abandonment, but this was held to be error on appeal. Byard v. Hoelscher (Conn. 1930) 151 Atl. 351.

Included in

Land Use Law Commons