Houston Bellaire, Ltd. v. TCP LB Portfolio I, L.P.
Texas Court of Appeals
981 S.W.2d 916 (1998)
Related developers built two office buildings in phases on adjacent tracts as part of one common economic plan, sharing a single widened driveway located entirely on the north tract rather than building separate access; Houston Bellaire (defendant) later acquired the north building out of foreclosure, and when TCP (plaintiff) sought to buy the south building, Houston refused TCP's request for a formal cross-easement, though both buildings continued using the shared driveway and parking until Houston began fencing it off. TCP sued and won an implied easement at trial, and Houston appealed, arguing the properties lacked the required unity of ownership since technically different entities owned each tract at severance.
Whether an easement by implication requires the claimant to show unity of ownership, apparent and continuous use, and reasonable necessity to the dominant estate's use and enjoyment.