Coumas v. Transcontinental Garage, Inc.

Wyoming Supreme Court
230 P.2d 748, 68 Wyo. 99 (1951)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A parol license to use another's land becomes an irrevocable easement when the licensee, in good faith reliance on the license, expends money or labor to make improvements of a permanent character, and revocation would be unjust and equivalent to a constructive fraud.

Facts:

Transcontinental Garage owned a two-story brick building on Lots 9 and 10, with its easterly wall situated entirely on its own property, Lot 9.
Tina Coumas and Mary Kochiras owned the adjacent Lot 8, which was located to the east of Transcontinental Garage's property.
In 1936, Coumas and Kochiras decided to demolish an old frame building on their lot and erect a new two-story brick building.
An agent for Coumas and Kochiras sought and received oral permission from the manager of Transcontinental Garage to anchor the new building's joists and bolts into the garage's easterly wall for support.
In reliance on this oral permission, Coumas and Kochiras proceeded to construct their new building, anchoring its second floor and roof joists to the defendant's wall.
In 1947, eleven years after granting permission, the manager of Transcontinental Garage demanded that Coumas and Kochiras cease using the wall, claiming the use was causing cracks.

Procedural Posture:

Tina Coumas and Mary Kochiras filed a lawsuit against Transcontinental Garage in a Wyoming trial court, seeking an injunction to stop the defendant from interfering with their use of the defendant's wall.
Transcontinental Garage filed a counterclaim asking the court to declare that the plaintiffs had no interest in the wall.
The trial court found that the plaintiffs had an irrevocable license to use the wall for support to a limited extent but did not have an ownership interest in the wall.
The trial court issued a perpetual injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, consistent with its finding.
Both Transcontinental Garage, as appellant, and Coumas and Kochiras, as cross-appellants, appealed the trial court's decree to the Supreme Court of Wyoming.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a property owner's oral license granting a neighbor permission to use a wall for support become an irrevocable easement when the licensee relies on that permission to construct a permanent building, making revocation inequitable?

Opinions:

Majority - Blume, Justice

Yes, an oral license becomes an irrevocable easement under such circumstances. While the general rule, consistent with the Statute of Frauds, is that a parol license is revocable at will, an exception exists based on the doctrine of equitable estoppel. Where a licensee has entered under a parol license and has expended money or labor in reliance upon it, the license becomes irrevocable. To permit revocation after the licensee has made substantial, permanent improvements would operate as a constructive fraud. In this case, Coumas and Kochiras incurred expense and constructed a permanent building in reliance on the permission granted by Transcontinental Garage. The nature of the improvement—a brick building—implies an intention of permanency. To allow revocation now would cause a large detriment to the plaintiffs, who cannot be returned to their original position, and would therefore be unjust.

Analysis:

This decision solidifies Wyoming's adherence to the equitable estoppel exception to the general rule that parol licenses are revocable, bringing the state's property law in line with a significant number of other jurisdictions. The case establishes that reliance on an oral agreement for the use of land can create a permanent property right, an easement, thereby carving out an important exception to the Statute of Frauds. By focusing on whether revocation would constitute a 'constructive fraud' and whether the parties can be returned to the 'status quo,' the court provides a framework for analyzing future disputes over executed licenses. This precedent has a significant impact on neighboring landowners, particularly in commercial settings, cautioning them that informal permissions, once acted upon, may become legally binding and permanent.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Coumas v. Transcontinental Garage, Inc. (1951)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"