Which best describes the nature of Jimmy's easement issue?

The most accurate description of Jimmy's easement issue is that it is an easement appurtenant that can be terminated by purchasing adjacent land. An easement appurtenant benefits a specific parcel of land (the dominant tenement) and runs with the land, meaning it is tied to the property itself rather than to an individual.

When a property owner purchases the adjacent land, which is typically the servient tenement burdened by the easement, the easement can be extinguished because there is no longer a separate estate needing that easement. In essence, ownership of both parcels eliminates the need for the easement, as the dominant and servient tenements would be unified under one owner.

This clarification helps illustrate the nature of easements in property law, particularly the nuances of how ownership and benefit interplay can lead to termination in specific circumstances.