prescriptive claim (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

prescriptive claim in Texas

13 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1976–2025 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Davis v. Carrikergreen
texapp · 1976 · cited in 7 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1976–2008
2 sentences

2008Davis v. Carriker, 536 S.W.2d 246, 250 (Tex.Civ.App.-Amarillo, 1976, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

2008Davis v. Carriker, 536 S.W.2d 246, 250 (Tex.Civ.App.–Amarillo, 1976, writ ref’d n.r.e.).

77
Brooks v. Jonesgreen
tex · 1979 · cited in 5 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2022
2 sentences

2022A prescriptive easement is shown by "the open, notorious, hostile, adverse, uninterrupted, exclusive and continuous use of the servient estate for a period of more than ten years, and the absence of any of these elements is fatal to the prescriptive claim." Allen v. Allen, 280 S.W.3d 366, 377 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008, pet. denied); see also Brooks v. Jones, 578 S.W.2d 669, 673 (Tex. 1979) ("To obtain a prescriptive easement one must use someone else's land in a manner that is open, notorious, continuous, exclusive, and adverse for the requisite period of time.").

2021A prescriptive easement is shown by “the open, notorious, hostile, adverse, uninterrupted, exclusive and continuous use of the servient estate for a period of more than ten years, and the absence of any of these elements is fatal to the prescriptive claim.” Allen v. Allen, 280 S.W.3d 366, 377 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008, pet. denied); see also Brooks v. Jones, 578 S.W.2d 669, 673 (Tex. 1979) (“To obtain a prescriptive easement one must use someone else’s land in a manner that is open, notorious, continuous, exclusive, and adverse for the requisite period of time.”).

55
Allen v. Allengreen
texapp · 2008 · cited in 5 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2022
2 sentences

2022A prescriptive easement is shown by "the open, notorious, hostile, adverse, uninterrupted, exclusive and continuous use of the servient estate for a period of more than ten years, and the absence of any of these elements is fatal to the prescriptive claim." Allen v. Allen, 280 S.W.3d 366, 377 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008, pet. denied); see also Brooks v. Jones, 578 S.W.2d 669, 673 (Tex. 1979) ("To obtain a prescriptive easement one must use someone else's land in a manner that is open, notorious, continuous, exclusive, and adverse for the requisite period of time.").

2021A prescriptive easement is shown by “the open, notorious, hostile, adverse, uninterrupted, exclusive and continuous use of the servient estate for a period of more than ten years, and the absence of any of these elements is fatal to the prescriptive claim.” Allen v. Allen, 280 S.W.3d 366, 377 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008, pet. denied); see also Brooks v. Jones, 578 S.W.2d 669, 673 (Tex. 1979) (“To obtain a prescriptive easement one must use someone else’s land in a manner that is open, notorious, continuous, exclusive, and adverse for the requisite period of time.”).

45
Texas State Board of Pharmacy v. Witchergreen
texapp · 2014 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025CR 290); see Witcher, 447 S.W.3d at 529 (observing that a standard meets the APA definition of a rule if it implements, interprets, or prescribes the agency’s policy that affects parties’ rights and has implications beyond the parties to the underlying proceeding).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Mark Harrington v. Dawson-Conway Ranch, Ltd. green
texapp · 2012
1 sentence

2013“Otherwise, the use (especially if joint) is presumed to be permissive, and a permissive use can never ripen into an easement by prescription.” Harrington, 372 S.W.3d at 718 .

12013–2013

Where else courts name it

TX 13 (1976–2025) MT 8 (1996–2023) LA 5 (1984–2012) VT 5 (1974–2005) CT 4 (2002–2025) GA 4 (1921–2013) CA 3 (1960–2022) ME 3 (1999–2012) AL 3 (1916–1964) IN 2 (2013–2020) NM 2 (1995–2021)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check