MacDonald v. Coffin's Field Trust, Inc.
| Decision Date | 15 July 2016 |
| Docket Number | 0774 CV 00064 |
| Parties | Donald MacDonald et al. v. Coffin's Field Trust, Inc. et al. [1] No. 134380 |
| Court | Massachusetts Superior Court |
FINDINGS, RULINGS AND ORDERS
In 1979, Betsy and Donald MacDonald (" plaintiffs") Michael Carroll and Marnie Edwards, along with Benjamin L Hall, Sr. and Teresa Hall, through the Ancient Way Trust (collectively referred to as the " buyers") purchased 40 acres of land for $30, 000. The land was originally part of the Watcha division layout established by the Martha's Vineyard Proprietors in 1743.[2] The Watcha division layout of 16 skinny, mile-long wood lots was bounded to the south by the Watcha Path, three rods in width, and to the north by the Mill Path, the main thoroughfare linking the eastern and western sections of Martha's Vineyard.
Since their 1979 acquisition of one-third interests in the 40-acre property, buyers have endeavored through multiple approaches to acquire an easement to what is now the County Road, a 36-foot-wide paved roadway flanked by substantial shoulders.
In 2007, the MacDonalds filed this action seeking an easement from their property to the County Road, a public road, which lies directly above the Mill Path, an unused ancient way. Plaintiffs claimed that the easement lies under the doctrine of " necessity" and under the doctrine of prescriptive use.
Although nominally named as defendants, Carroll and Edwards, joined by the Halls, owners of abutting property referred to as " Starbucks, " support plaintiffs' claim to an easement over land owned by Coffin's Field Trust, Inc. (" CFT"). CFT objects to any easement over its land to the Mill Path or to the County Road. According to CFT, an easement by necessity running through their land would violate the original grantor's intent in conveying the land now owned by plaintiffs and CFT; would infringe upon property rights held by CFT in land that lacks any common origin with plaintiffs' land; and would unreasonably interfere with CFT's enjoyment of its land. As to any such easement under the doctrine of prescriptive use, CFT maintains that it lacks any foothold in the facts or in the law and may be safely characterized as a contrivance.
I now take up concisely the procedural history of this eight years of litigation, followed by detailed findings of fact and rulings of law.
It is now 2016. On October 30, 2007, Donald and Betsy MacDonald filed a Complaint against CFT, Benjamin L. and Teresa Hall and Michael Carroll, and Marnie Edwards. The Complaint sought as relief: (1) a Declaratory Judgment that plaintiffs and their co-owners of the 40-acre parcel of land possess an easement by necessity across the Coffin's Field lands " along and over the road, to and from the County Road"; (2) a Declaratory Judgment that " the road to and from County Road" constitutes " a right of way"; (3) a Declaration that plaintiffs and their co-owners of the 40-acre parcel have acquired under G.L.c. 187, § 2 (easements by prescription), a right of way over the Coffin's Field lands allowing for travel by foot and vehicle along and over " the road to and from the County Road"; and (4) an injunction prohibiting CFT and its surrogates from erecting barricades and other obstructions blocking access to the easement possessed by plaintiffs and other interested parties.
On March 19, 2008, CFT answered, counter-claimed and cross claimed. The counter-claims and cross claims consisted: (1) quiet title under G.L.c. 240, § § 6-10, by declaring that plaintiffs and others lack any right to use CFT's land; and declaring that any use of CFT's land by plaintiffs has been through " permission"; (2) abuse of process; and (3) a Declaratory Judgment that plaintiffs and Starbucks Trust lack any easement or other right to use CFT's lands.
On May 6, 2009, Starbucks Trust filed cross claims and counterclaims. The claims generally paralleled plaintiff's claims.
Disputes about misjoinder of parties as defendants and production of documents caused exceptional delay.
In a Pre-trial Memorandum, dated April 1, 2013, the MacDonalds, Carroll, and Edwards, and defendants CFT and Hall as trustee of the Starbucks Trust, set forth theories of their claims and defenses. Plaintiffs maintained that the easement by necessity ran from the land owned by the Ancient Way Trust over lands owned by CFT to the County Road. Alternatively, plaintiffs maintained that they possessed an easement over CFT's lands to the County Road, under the doctrine of a prescriptive easement. Starbucks, referencing the same legal theories, claimed an easement over the lands owned by the Ancient Way Trust and CFT to the County Road.
CFT denied that plaintiffs possess any easement over its land. It agreed that plaintiffs and Starbucks had an easement over the Moltzes' land to Watcha Path.
On August 8, 2013, Hall, as trustee of Starbucks, amended its Pre-trial Memorandum. In the amendment, Hall identified Attorney Christopher Pitt as an expert on the theory of an easement by necessity. According to the expert disclosure, Pitt would be expected to testify that at the time of the 1865 conveyances " reasonable access from Watcha Path for the Trust [did] not exist." The amendment further identified Douglas Dowling, a surveyor, as a witness and disclosed that Dowling would testify that access over Watcha Path failed to exist in 1865. He would also testify that presently Watcha Path fails to provide reasonable access, stemming from its " topography, wetlands and road conditions" and that curing the obstacles to reasonable access would be unreasonably burdensome due to cost and current municipal regulations. Dowling would identify reasonable access as being over CFT's lands to the County Road.
Over the course of fourteen sittings, the court listened to the testimony of fourteen witnesses, received one hundred and five exhibits, and attended a view. Before the trial ended, the court issued a procedural order governing requirements for proposed findings and rulings. The order stated that " each party must submit proposed rulings for all legal points or decisions that the party expects the court to address." The court expanded on the scope of this obligation, pointing out that the duty included " any motion in limine or evidentiary question that ha[d] been raised and preserved during the trial . . ." The order advised counsel that any substantial deviation from the order's requirements would constitute a waiver. The court has relied on the procedural order in preparing its findings of fact and rulings of law.
In 1743, the Martha's Vineyard Proprietors set off the Watcha Division, consisting of 16 skinny wood lots approximately one-mile-long, running from the north on the Mill Path to the south on Watcha Path. The Mill Path went back to the earliest settlement of the island and perhaps before that time. Back then, it represented the main thoroughfare linking the western and eastern sections of the island. It constituted the shortest route between Edgartown and Tisbury.
Eight and one-half feet in width, the Mill Path[3] was used by ox carts carrying cut wood to market. The amount of cart traffic caused depressions in the road. By the " 1850s" people were anticipating that the above the Mill Path would attract the use of carriages.
In 1854, officials had announced the layout of a new road above the Mill Path. On June 30, 1854, the Vineyard Gazette reported the following about the construction of a new road now known as the County Road:
As ultimately constructed, this paved roadway was 66 feet in width, with 30 of the 66 feet devoted to shoulders.
On March 24, 1847 and October 15, 1851, William and Thomas Norton, by way of deeds, conveyed lots 4 through 9 of the Watcha Division to Hiram Dexter. The Mill Path constituted the northerly boundary of the Norton conveyances and Watcha Path represented the southern boundary of the conveyances. Only the Watcha Path was laid out as a public way.
Watcha Division Lot 10 constituted the western boundary of the Dexter lands and Lot 3 constituted the eastern boundary. The Watcha lands owned by Dexter consisted of woodlands which were thickest in the area of Watcha Path to the south, thinning out to the north where the Mill Path was located. The Mill Path was about eight and one-half feet in width.
In the 1980s, Douglas Dowling, a civil engineer and land surveyor performed an original survey of the Watcha Division lands. Hollis Smith (" Smith") previously performed survey work of some of the Watcha Division lands. Smith is a fastidious surveyor. Besides working as a surveyor, Smith has a hobby of tracing the lines of the Vineyard's original divisions of land. He knew from his previous survey of the Watcha Division...
To continue reading
Request your trial