UT · jury_instructions
MUJI 2d CV941
Easement by Implication. Elements.
To succeed on this claim, [Plaintiff] must prove by clear and convincing evidence each of the following elements:
(1) All of the property was once owned by a single landowner who then divided the land and transferred away one tract of land;
(2) At the time the property was divided, the use giving rise to the easement [across/ on] the [retained/transferred] parcel for the benefit of the [transferred/retained] parcel was apparent, obvious, and visible;
(3) The easement is reasonably necessary to the enjoyment of the [transferred/retained] property; and
(4) The use giving rise to the easement was continuous rather than sporadic.
Provenance
- Source
- legacy.utcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-22
- Edition
- 2026-08-21
- Content hash
4749837a37e42d85d83ce617f81c0a7bb3e35455f0eb0bcb8b3eb24df730eb99
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.