1. Owner owned many acres of land. The northern boundary of the land was fronted on a road, and the southern boundary was fronted on a lake. Owner's house was located in the middle of the property, about halfway between the road and the lake. One day Owner decided to divide the land into three large lots. The first lot, the northern most lot, fronted on the road; The third lot, the southernmost lot, fronted on the lake. The second lot, which contained Owner's house, was located between Lots one and three, with no frontage on either the road or the lake. The only ingress and egress to the second lot was over a clearly marked and graded dirt driveway that crossed Lot one, connecting Lot two with the road. Owner continued to live in his house on Lot two, but he sold Lot one to Harvey. The deed to Harvey reserved an easement over the dirt driveway that connected Lot two with the road. Five years after Owner's conveyance to Harvey, the county constructed a new road along the westernmost boundary of Lots one, two and three. The new road led from the old road to the lake. Owner began using the new road for ingress and egress to his property, maintaining but not using the dirt driveway that crossed Lot one. If Harvey desiring to sell Lot one, brought an action to enjoin Owner from further use of the right of way across Lot one, the court should find for
   1. Owner, because his easement was created by express reservation.
   2. Owner, because an implied easement by necessity does not terminate upon the termination of the necessity.
   3. Harvey, because an implied easement by necessity terminates upon termination of the necessity.
   4. Harvey, because continued use of the easement by the landowner will unreasonably reduce the value of Lot one.