How Does a Court Determine if Use of Another's Land is Hostile or Permissive

[budwad]

Maybe on the horse/buggy but the NY courts rely on the "necessity" part of the Implied tests and in our case the use was a convenience not necessity as they have plenty of public road access/frontage.

That is correct. Necessity is necessary for an easement by implication in most if not all jurisdictions. I was only commenting on your presumption that there could be no easement by implication because cars were not invented at the time the property was split.

Also our title chain was severed before cars were invented so no implied easement potential either.

[Winger]

thank you for the link! Interesting reading/cases