[KevinB]

“Right of Way” is enshrined in all property law. This is basic miscarriage of justice clearly greased by corruption and payoffs.

It is enshrined if you actually have a right of way. The ferry company did not have a right of way over the land of the plaintiff. This was a property rights case - nothing more nothing less. Conservatives should actually applaud the decision because it upheld private property rights.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

I’m amazed it took centuries to figure this one out.

[FredZarguna]

Whatever right of way the ferry owner might have claimed under the common law of traditional use was clearly not in force once the original rental agreement was made. The claim that this breaks a tradition going back hundreds of years is nonsense, since the ferry paid rent as recently as the beginning of the 21st century.

[eastexsteve]

It is enshrined if you actually have a right of way. The ferry company did not have a right of way over the land of the plaintiff. This was a property rights case - nothing more nothing less. Conservatives should actually applaud the decision because it upheld private property rights.

Exactly! There was no eminent domain here as the ferry was a private enterprise. Any landowner should be applauding this decision.

[HamiltonJay]

Exactly