To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Leabo v. Leninski

Citation. 438 A.2d 1153 (Conn. 1981)
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here

Brief Fact Summary.

Leabo sued Leninski claiming that opening a private beach easement to the public interfered with Leabo’s easement right to use the beach.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A beach easement involves more than a right of access.


An estate that was subdivided into six lots, owned a private road, and a beach, was sold to Falcon, Inc. (Falcon). The six lots and the road were sold to Falcon, with rights to use the beach. Leninski purchased the land that contained the beach and opened the beach up to the public. Falcon’s successor, Leabo, sued Leninski claiming that Leninski interfered with Leabo’s right to use the beach. The lower court granted judgment to Leabo and Leninski appealed.


Whether a beach easement involves more than a right of access?


Yes. The judgment of the lower court is upheld. The original grant created an easement appurtenant that attached permanently to the land and the previous owners of Leninski’s estate acknowledged that the beach was not open to the public and did not object to it’s private use. The beach easements were supposed to be permanent and run with the ownership of the six lots. Given the limited size of the beach, opening the beach to the public prevented Leabo’s enjoyable use of the beach.


A beach easement gives someone the right to access a beach on someone else’s land, as well as recreational use, enjoyment, and pleasure.

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following