Laserfiche WebLink
v&itJMB V. Lavrenev <br />ceart Filv Wo. CT §3-12901 <br />roadvay over Tract ® vould not be Halted to a single residence on <br />tbe then existing tracts. Rather, the clear language of the I97f <br />easeaent agreement allows use of the easement by subdivided lots <br />within each of the dominant tracts. As this is also consistent <br />with existing Minnesota law. Plaintiffs may extend the present <br />roadvay to serve subdivided lots within Tract A. <br />For the foregoing reasons. Plaintiffs notion for summary <br />judgment is granted. Plaintiffs may extend the current roadway <br />over Tract E to serve subdivided lots contained in the northern <br />portion of Tract A. Furthermore, there is nothing in the 1976 deed <br />or 1978 casement agreement which prevents Plaintiffs from <br />subdividing their property <br />D.C.O.