Epstein Family Partnership v. Kmart
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
12 F.3d 762 (1994)
Relevant factsFree
Epstein Family Partnership (EFP) subdivided its property and sold part of it to Kmart (defendant) while reserving an express right-of-way easement for a retained landlocked parcel, later leasing that retained parcel to Levitz Furniture, whose lease with EFP barred exterior signage without EFP's written consent; when Kmart tried to remove a sign Levitz had erected on Kmart's own property, EFP sued to enjoin Kmart, and Levitz claimed an implied easement for the signage. The district court found an implied easement existed and enjoined Kmart.
IssueFree
Whether an implied easement is created as long as it is clear that the parties intended to create an easement.