32. Smith had an easement by necessity to use a road near Johnson's farmhouse. The pickup truck that Smith drove sent dust toward the house. Does this give Johnson grounds to terminate the easement
Answer: C
No, because Smith must be allowed access to his land no matter what the inconvenience to Johnson
Smith's easement by necessity ensures that he has access to his property, regardless of the inconvenience or discomfort it may cause to Johnson. The nature of an easement by necessity is to provide essential access, and this right supersedes the nuisance of dust created by Smith's truck.
A) Yes, because an easement by necessity must not run contrary to the interest of either party
This option incorrectly suggests that the easement can be terminated if it causes inconvenience to Johnson. However, easements by necessity are established to ensure essential access, and the interests of the dominant estate holder, in this case, Smith, take precedence.
B) Yes, because an easement by necessity exists at the pleasure of the servient estate holder
This statement is misleading as it implies that Johnson can revoke the easement at will. An easement by necessity is a legal right that cannot simply be terminated based on the preferences of the servient estate holder; it exists to fulfill a critical need for access.
C) No, because Smith must be allowed access to his land no matter what the inconvenience to Johnson
This option correctly recognizes that Smith's right to access his land is paramount, even if it results in some inconvenience to Johnson. The legal principle behind easements by necessity is to ensure that individuals can reach their property, which cannot be dismissed due to minor disturbances.
D) No, because an easement by necessity cannot be terminated under any circumstances
While this option asserts that an easement by necessity cannot be terminated, it is overly absolute. While such easements are difficult to terminate, they can be subject to termination under specific legal conditions, thus making this option inaccurate.
Conclusion
The correct answer is C, as it emphasizes the fundamental principle that easements by necessity prioritize access over minor inconveniences. The other options either misinterpret the nature of easements or inaccurately represent the rights of the servient estate holder. Thus, Johnson cannot terminate the easement due to the dust from Smith's truck.