An owner of 40 acres of mountain land sold the western 20 acres to a buyer. Because no access to any public road existed on the western side of the property, the deed conveying title to the buyer included an easement for ingress and egress that ran along the southern border of the owner's land. This deed was duly recorded. About the same time that this sale took place, the county extended the public road so that it abutted on the buyer's 20 acres. The buyer then built a cabin on the property. Later, the owner and the buyer both sold their 20 acres to the owner's cousin. The cousin then sold the 20 acres acquired from the buyer to his lawyer and sold the other 20 acres to a doctor. All deeds involved in the various conveyances of the 20-acre parcels were validly recorded. Neither the cousin-lawyer deed nor the cousin-doctor deed made any mention of easements or rights-of-way. In fact, no use was ever made of the easement. A few years later, the lawyer sold his 20 acres to a development company that wished to build a hunting lodge on the property. The development company now wants to construct a road across the doctor's property in the manner contemplated in the deed from the original owner to the buyer. What is the strongest argument as to why the development company should not be permitted to construct the road