Continuing Trespass is Not Always a Permanent Injury

WBW Holdings, LLC v. Clamon

Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-20-00397-CV (November 12, 2020)
Justices Myers, Nowell (Viewpoint readily available right here), as well as Evans

Good fences make great neighbors … sometimes. Two celebrations owning adjacent land came to be entailed in a disagreement concerning whether the border in between their properties was the facility line of the region road between them or to the south of that roadway. Taking the last setting, the Clamons erected a fencing in between the WBW home as well as the county road (allegedly on their property), disallowing WBW’s accessibility to the road, as well as WBW reduced the fencing to restore accessibility.

Lawsuits took place, and also the test court gave a short-term order, telling WBW from crossing over the boundary insisted by the Clamons. The Clamons suggested they had “no sufficient remedy, brief of injunctive alleviation, to stop WBW’s agents from trespassing on their land” which trespassing on land “is of such a nature that the damage to the Clamon siblings is irreversible; it merely can not be determined by any kind of economic standard.” The Dallas Court disagreed, holding that trespass alone is not an irreversible injury. The Clamons stopped working to show that the claimed trespass would certainly attack the possession of their land, damage the use as well as satisfaction of their land, or cause possible loss of rights in real estate. Without any evidence of a potential, unavoidable, as well as irreversible injury, the test court erred in providing the injunction.

Released at Fri, 13 Nov 2020 21:16:00 +0000

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.