Paul Atkinson purchased land from Donald Mentzel that included an easement across Mentzel's land s that Atkinson could have access to his garage. Atkinson wished to install telephone cable along the easement so that he could more fully use his garage. At the time of the conveyance, the Atkinson property did not have utility service. The easement was described as a right-of-way and included the following:

The purpose of this easement is to provide access from Lake Shore Drive to the following described real estate and shall allow access for all uses of said property other than retail sales.

Should Atkinson be permitted to install the telephone cable along the easement? Why or why not? Is there an argument you would find persuasive that may lead you to decide the opposite way?

Atkinson v. Mentzel, 566 N.W. 2d 158 (Wis. App. 1997)