A new way to look at corner crossing?

[std7mag]

Ok, so I was watching YouTube and a video came up about a landlocked piece of property being surrounded by a fence.

The property owner that was fenced in sued.
Surrounding property owner had to take fence down due to a Federal law labeled "Access by Necessity".
Essential saying that no land can be landlocked. An easement for access must be provided.

I'm hoping someone with more legal experience than me can shed some light on this.

Thanks!

 

[TOGIE]

if you're hinting at landlocked public land....

untested legal grounds, but the UIA on it's face says I should have the right to access landlocked public land.

someday we may finally see that battle play out in court too.

 

[std7mag]

if you're hinting at landlocked public land....

untested legal grounds, but the UIA on it's face says I should have the right to access landlocked public land.

someday we may finally see that battle play out in court too.

I'm guessing that the biggest issue would be defining the word "necessity".

Is it necessary to go onto that land to hunt? Probably not.
Is it necessary to have an easement for access to said land, which is public land. Probably yes.

 

[Rack Daniels]

@Elky Welky is the only one I know is a bonafide lawyer. Even then I don’t know what practice he specializes in… mighta been another but can’t remember who… SAJ?

 

[SAJ-99]

Ok, so I was watching YouTube and a video came up about a landlocked piece of property being surrounded by a fence.

The property owner that was fenced in sued.
Surrounding property owner had to take fence down due to a Federal law labeled "Access by Necessity".
Essential saying that no land can be landlocked. An easement for access must be provided.

I'm hoping someone with more legal experience than me can shed some light on this.

Thanks!

Private property is usually prohibited from being landlocked. States have varying laws on this, hence the word usually. Public land is obviously different.

 

[std7mag]

Private property is usually prohibited from being landlocked. States have varying laws on this, hence the word usually. Public land is obviously different.

Yet, public land that is landlocked isn't very public.

 

[SAJ-99]

Yet, public land that is landlocked isn't very public.

Sure but Helicopters. The definition is what type and ease of access. Regardless of what we want to see, it is unrealistic to think every piece of public land should have an easement to it.

 

[Rack Daniels]

Regardless of what we want to see, it is unrealistic to think every piece of public land should have an easement to it.

WHAT!? Who’s side are you on anyway

 

[Rack Daniels]

How is it unrealistic for every tax payer that owns that PUBLIC LAND to think they should have some form of access to it? You can’t just helicopter in Willy Nilly to every and any piece of public land so that’s no excuse. Serious question…

 

[SAJ-99]

How is it unrealistic for every tax payer that owns that PUBLIC LAND to think they should have some form of access to it? You can’t just helicopter in Willy Nilly to every and any piece of public land so that’s no excuse. Serious question…

Just saying it gets complicated. In the OP, it’s private vs public. For just public, Landlocked and connected by corner are different. To take it further, boot leather across a corner is different than tire rubber across a corner. So many variables exist it is hard to just make a simple rule. Is there a limit for you to how long a private easement should be to reach an isolated section of public land for your use? 1 mile, 3 miles, 10? The question of necessity is right there with the question of fairness.

 

[Forkyfinder]

How is it unrealistic for every tax payer that owns that PUBLIC LAND to think they should have some form of access to it? You can’t just helicopter in Willy Nilly to every and any piece of public land so that’s no excuse. Serious question…

Hence the crux of some reasonable solutions that dont exist in the world of partisan politics, crooked influence, and special interest..... Land swaps are great - until the taxpayer/public lands user takes a ride.

 

[Rack Daniels]

1 mile, 3 miles, 10? The question of necessity is right there with the question of fairness.

Fairness to the taxpayer; the owners, should be a necessity. The distance should be as long as necessary…. We pay for it anyway!

 

[SAJ-99]

Fairness to the taxpayer; the owners, should be a necessity. The distance should be as long as necessary…. We pay for it anyway!

Wow. OK. "As long as necessary" pretty much ignores the entire concept of fairness. What if multiple private owners abut the section. Do they all have to provide an easement? just one? What if it is a terrible easement and runs into a rock cliff? Who has maintenance responsibilities on the easement? Again, you want what you want and want to ignore the immeasurable scenarios that exist in real life on these properties. To the point of the OP, it would be nice if public property had the same rights as private property, but that isn't happening either. Too many people hate the government (which, as you point out, is you the taxpayer).