Olwen owned 80 acres of land, fronting on a town road. Two years ago, Olwen sold to Buck the back 40 acres. The 40 acres sold to Buck did not adjoin any public road. Olwen's deed to Buck expressly granted a right-of-way over a specified strip of Olwen's retained 40 acres, so Buck could reach the town road. The deed was promptly and properly recorded. Last year, Buck conveyed the back 40 acres to Sam. They had discussed the right-of-way over Olwen's land to the road, but Buck's deed to Sam made no mention of it. Sam began to use the right-of-way as Buck had, but Olwen use the right-of-way as Buck had, but Olwen sued to enjoin such use by Sam. The court should decide for 
Sam, because he has an easement by implication.  Sam, because the easement appurtenant passed to him as a result of Buck's deed to him.  Olwen, because Buck's easement in gross was not transferable.  Olwen, because Buck's deed failed expressly to transfer the right-of-way to Sam. 
Question: Olwen owned 80 acres of land, fronting on a town road. Two years ago, Olwen sold to Buck the back 40 acres. The 40 acres sold to Buck did not adjoin any public road. Olwen's deed to Buck expressly granted a right-of-way over a specified strip of Olwen's retained 40 acres, so Buck could reach the town road. The deed was promptly and properly recorded. Last year, Buck conveyed the back 40 acres to Sam. They had discussed the right-of-way over Olwen's land to the road, but Buck's deed to Sam made no mention of it. Sam began to use the right-of-way as Buck had, but Olwen use the right-of-way as Buck had, but Olwen sued to enjoin such use by Sam. The court should decide for 
A. Sam, because he has an easement by implication. 
B. Sam, because the easement appurtenant passed to him as a result of Buck's deed to him. 
C. Olwen, because Buck's easement in gross was not transferable. 
D. Olwen, because Buck's deed failed expressly to transfer the right-of-way to Sam. 
Answer: