## Facts

- A deed conveyed coal and mineral rights in a 265-acre tract and granted an easement allowing passage across the tract to reach other lands belonging to the grantees (and successors) for mining and removal of coal from those other lands.
- Estil Ball later acquired about 100 acres of the 265-acre tract; his land was burdened by the easement.
- Raven Red Ash Coal Co., lessee of coal and mineral rights in approximately 3,000 acres owned by the original grantees and successors, built and used a tramway/rail line across the tract, including roughly 2,800 feet across Ball’s parcel.
- For about five years, Raven hauled large quantities of coal over the tramway from the original 3,000-acre holdings (authorized use under the easement).
- During the same period, Raven also hauled 49,016 tons of coal from five additional small tracts in which it later acquired rights, but which were not within the lands covered by the easement grant (unauthorized use).
- Ball sued to recover the value of Raven’s unauthorized use of the easement across his land, seeking damages measured by the reasonable value of the use and occupation.
- A jury awarded Ball $500, and judgment was entered; Raven sought appellate review challenging the form of action and the damages measure.

## Issues

1. Whether a landowner may recover in assumpsit for the fair value of a defendant’s deliberate, continuous, unauthorized use of an easement area, on an implied promise to pay for benefits received.
2. What measure of damages applies when an easement holder uses the easement beyond the grant to transport materials from non-covered lands.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the $500 judgment for Ball.
- The court held that using an easement for purposes not included in the grant is a trespass.
- Because Raven’s excess use was intentional, sustained, and profitable, the law could imply a promise to pay the reasonable value of that use, permitting recovery in assumpsit for use and occupation.
- The court upheld damages based on the reasonable value of the unauthorized use and declined to disturb the jury’s valuation on the evidence presented.

## Legal Principles

- Any use of an easement beyond the scope of the grant constitutes a trespass.
- When a trespass consists of deliberate, continuous use yielding substantial benefit to the wrongdoer, the landowner may elect an assumpsit remedy based on an implied promise to pay for the value of the use, preventing unjust enrichment.
- In such cases, damages may be measured by the reasonable value of the unauthorized use rather than being confined to nominal damages typical of trespass absent special injury.

## Conclusion

The court held that Raven’s intentional use of a tramway easement to haul coal from non-covered tracts exceeded the grant and, because the overuse produced substantial benefit, supported recovery in assumpsit for the reasonable value of the unauthorized use; the jury’s $500 award was affirmed.


Raven Red Ash Coal Co. v. Ball, 185 Va. 534, 39 S.E.2d 231 (Va. 1946)