When Is A Stranger Not A Stranger?

In a landmark decision from the Appellate Division, Second Department, Chris achieved a winning result for our client, establishing in a case of first impression who really is a “stranger” when considering the “stranger to the deed rule.” The “stranger to the deed rule” holds that, when a grantor executes a deed that purports to reserve or except an easement in favor of a third party, the deed does not create a valid interest in favor of that third party who is considered a “stranger to the deed.”

In the case in question, our client purchased property in a Bridgehampton subdivision (Lot 4), which, along with three other lots, on a facial reading of the relevant deeds, benefited from a pedestrian right of way to the shore of Sam’s Creek. When the client began to clear the right of way to enable use of the right of way and, ultimately, the construction of a dock, the servient estate owners (over whose property, Lot 6, the right of way ran) moved to prevent the clearing and commenced a lawsuit. Fortunately, the clients had purchased affirmative title insurance to guarantee their rights to the easement and their legal fees were paid for by the title company.

READ MORE

Chris and Jen recently won an appeal of a summary judgement that the Supreme Court, Suffolk County rendered against our client. In Sacasa v. Trust, plaintiffs sought to establish an easement by prescription over our client’s property to get to the ocean beach in East Hampton from their properties on Windmill Lane from Further Lane. We argued that, to establish such an easement, the plaintiffs first had to establish rights over a private road (Windmill Lane) to get to our client’s property where the alleged easement supposedly began. We further argued that the summary judgement awarded by the lower court was invalid because the judgement had been awarded without the court requiring plaintiffs to name the owners of the private road as necessary defendants. The Appellate Division, Second Department agreed with our argument and vacated the summary judgement, remanding the case to the trial court to determine which additional parties must be added to the case.