## Facts

- The Pavliks owned Ohio land burdened by a 30-foot right-of-way easement originally granted to Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Company (Consolidation’s predecessor) “for the purposes and with the rights of constructing, maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, replacing and removing one pipe line for the transportation of coal slurry.”
- The easement included a defeasance clause: if the pipeline “shall cease to be used for the purpose set forth herein for the period of one year,” the grantee’s rights would “cease and determine,” and the land would be free of the easement “without further act or writing.”
- Consolidation built and operated a 103-mile coal-slurry pipeline to supply coal to Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company’s Eastlake plant; the pipeline operated successfully from 1957 until August 1963.
- In May 1963, Consolidation and CEI entered a supplemental agreement placing the pipeline in an inactive state; Consolidation remained obligated to keep it in standby condition so it could resume operation upon notice.
- After August 1963, no coal slurry was transported through the line, though Consolidation maintained the pipeline so it could be restarted.
- While the pipeline remained inactive, Consolidation and the landowners executed a series of written extensions of the one-year nonuse period in the defeasance clause to “preserve the status quo” during negotiations about (1) removing the defeasance clause and (2) allowing transport of products other than coal slurry.
- Negotiations failed, and no further extensions were executed after May 1967; the pipeline still did not transport coal slurry.
- The Pavliks sought a declaratory judgment that the easement had terminated. Consolidation removed the action to federal district court on diversity grounds. The case was tried on stipulated facts.
- The district court ruled for Consolidation, reasoning that keeping the line in standby readiness prevented termination. The Pavliks appealed.

## Issues

1. Under the defeasance clause, does “use” require actual transportation of coal slurry, or is maintaining the pipeline in standby readiness enough?
2. After the last extension expired, did the easement terminate by its own terms once a full year passed without coal-slurry transportation?

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment.
- Reading the granting clause and defeasance clause together, the court held the stated purpose was transportation of coal slurry, and “cease to be used for the purpose set forth” meant cessation of that actual transportation.
- Maintenance and readiness to resume operations did not satisfy the contractual requirement of “use” for the stated purpose.
- Because no coal slurry was transported for more than one year after the extensions ended in May 1967, the defeasance clause was triggered and the easement terminated automatically (“without further act or writing”).

## Legal Principles

- Under Ohio law, when deed or contract language is clear, courts enforce it as written and do not rewrite the parties’ agreement.
- An easement granted for a specific, stated purpose may be conditioned on continued performance of that purpose; if the condition is expressed in a defeasance clause, failure to satisfy it ends the easement according to its terms.
- “Use” tied to a defined purpose (here, transporting coal slurry) refers to actual use for that purpose, not mere upkeep of facilities that could be used later.
- The parties’ written extensions while negotiating different terms supported the conclusion that, absent an extension, prolonged nontransport would end the easement.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held that the coal-slurry pipeline easement terminated under its defeasance clause because, after the final extension expired, the pipeline was not actually used to transport coal slurry for more than one year; keeping the line in standby condition did not count as “use” for the purpose stated in the deed.


Pavlik v. Consolidation Coal Co., 456 F.2d 378 (1972)