Williams v. Zerda

Summary

This case involves a dispute over easement of right of way between neighboring property owners. Respondent Zerda owned an enclosed property without adequate access to a public highway and sought right of way through petitioner Spouses Williams' property. The RTC initially ruled against Zerda, finding he caused his own property's isolation by intervening in negotiations. However, the CA and SC reversed, establishing that all requisites for legal easement were met: the property was genuinely enclosed, Zerda offered to pay indemnity, the isolation was not self-caused, and the proposed pathway was least prejudicial to the servient estate. The SC emphasized that the criterion of least prejudice prevails over shortest distance in determining proper easement location. The decision affirms property owners' rights to demand easement when their land lacks adequate public access.