Houston Bellaire, Ltd. v. TCP LB Portfolio I, L.P. Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Houston Bellaire, Ltd. v. TCP LB Portfolio I, L.P. | 981 S.W.2d 916 (1998)

An easement is the legal right to access or pass through property belonging to another person. In Houston Bellaire versus T C P, the court considered an easement by implication between two tracts of a building project owned by separate entities.

A seven acre property was split into two tracts of land. The northern tract was purchased by Harvin Moore, who obtained an option to purchase the other tract. That day, the northern tract was conveyed to Corporate Plaza Company, a joint venture owned by Moore and three other partners. The joint venture built an office building called Corporate Plaza One on the northern tract.

Soon after, the southern tract was conveyed to Moore, and three years later, conveyed to Corporate Plaza Two Company, a joint venture owned by three of the four partners of Corporate Plaza Company. This joint venture built an office building called Corporate Plaza Two on the southern tract.

The properties were developed as a common plan with a dual driveway built on the northern tract and widened to serve the southern tract. The buildings were considered one economic unit constructed in two phases. Because of the shared driveway, visitors and tenants could use any driveway onto the property to reach either building.

Both tracts were eventually separately purchased out of foreclosure, and then purchased again by different buyers. Houston Bellaire purchased Corporate Plaza One. Hammerly Corporation purchased Corporate Plaza Two.

A decade later, Hammerly sold the southern tract to T C P. Before the sale, Hammerly asked Houston Bellaire to execute a cross easement between the tracts, allowing tenants and visitors of the southern tract to use the driveways, parking lots, and curbcuts on the northern tract. Houston Bellaire declined and intended to build a wall between the properties.

T C P and Houston Bellaire couldn’t reach an agreement. Tenants and visitors to both properties used the dual driveway and parking lots until Houston Bellaire started building a fence between the tracts.

T C P sued Houston Bellaire. The trial court granted T C P an easement by implication and permanently enjoined Houston Bellaire from building the fence. Houston Bellaire appealed.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/houston...

The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/houston...

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_...

Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom  

Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom  

#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries