Case Caption: Bruce W. Streibich v. Karen R. UnderwoodCase Number: SCT-CIV-2019-0038Date: 03/23/2021Author: Hodge, Rhys S. Citation: 2021 VI 3Summary: The Superior Court’s grant of partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs in an action seeking a permanent injunction preventing a landowner from blocking access to an alleged dirt road on his property, the judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part. The Superior Court did not issue a valid permanent injunction under Rule 65, and did not address the governing factors, thus there is no valid permanent injunction. Jurisdiction is accepted here because the order complies with the required factors. On the merits of the motion for partial summary judgment, there is no express easement over the contested right of way as a matter of law. There is an easement by implication but a genuine dispute of material fact exists as to its scope. The easement is located where depicted on a map and not over the identified dirt road. There is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether an easement by necessity exists. As a result, the grant of summary judgment on plaintiffs’ motion for declaratory judgment as depicted on the map is affirmed, and grant of summary judgment on the other plaintiffs’ motion is reversed. The case is remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.Attachment: Open Document or Opinion