hereafter made or executed in which the words “trustee” or “as trustee” are added to the name of the grantee, and in which no beneficiaries are named, the nature and purposés 62) (recognizing that while all of the tract was in common ownership of a single owner, no easement could arise in favor of one lot in tract over another lot); Hidalgo County Water Control and Imp. Dist. No. 16 v. Hippchen, 233 F.2d 712 (C.A.5 Tex. 1956),(recognizing that for an easement to exist the dominant and servient estates must be held by different owners); Marshall v. Callahan, 241 Mo.App. 336, 229 S.W.2d 730 (1950) (recognizing that to acquire an easement there must be a dominant and a servient estate and they must not be lodged in the same person); Goldstein v. Beal, 317 Mass. 750, 59 N.E.2d 712 (1945) (<HOLDING>); Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Caswell, 1 S.W.2d
holding that where there is common ownership of two parcels there could be noeasement in favor of one lot operating as a burden to the other holding that where the issue is one of arbitrability the federal presumption in favor of arbitration shifts to favor a court determination recognizing that as long as the lots belonged to the same owner there could be no easement in favor of one lot or servitude upon the other holding that in some circumstances a rightofway because of location and function may separate two parcels so that they cannot be used as one lot holding the interests of justice require that in a doubtful case  any error if there is to be one should be committed in favor of allowing a class action citations omitted