Servitude of Passage Not Extinguished by Division of Dominant Estate

A property owner sued to stop neighbors from using a servitude of passage across their land, arguing the servitude was extinguished by the division of the dominant estate into multiple parcels, none of which retained the necessity that originally justified the servitude's creation. The court held that the division of the dominant estate did not extinguish the servitude, reasoning that the original necessity for the passage, even if existing for only one part of the now-divided estate, justified the continued existence of the servitude for that portion, and that the servitude's scope remained tied to the original purpose, which was to provide access to the property, not to the specific configuration of the parcels.