2019 Ohio 898
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Ronald and Janeile Bowling bought property in 1992 subject to a written 30-foot ingress/egress easement reserved by Dean and Sandra Purnhagen; Patricia Berry later acquired the dominant parcel by deed in 1995.
- The 1992 survey/plat incorrectly depicted the easement running into a creek; Wallingford later prepared a corrected survey (Plaintiff’s Ex. 31) showing the easement along the existing gravel road.
- Disputes arose over use and maintenance of the gravel roadway easement, debris placement, erosion of the creek bank, and two severe flood events (1997 and 2010).
- Berry sued for injunctive relief in 2012; after a three-day bench trial (spread over 2013), the trial court issued a judgment granting permanent relief and ordering (inter alia) reformation of deed/plat descriptions to reflect the corrected survey and that the parties share equally the cost to repair the creek bank.
- The Bowlings appealed, challenging (1) the court’s order to update legal descriptions (reformation), (2) the equal-cost maintenance order, (3) the court’s refusal to find Berry caused flooding, and (4) the court’s refusal to find Berry trespassed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Berry) | Defendant's Argument (Bowling) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Reformation / update deeds to corrected survey | Reformation appropriate because original metes and bounds were correct; corrected survey reflects parties’ true intent and fixes a mutual mistake | Reformation was improper; appellants argued the court should not order parties to change deed descriptions and contested mutual mistake | Court upheld reformation: clear and convincing evidence of mutual mistake; equitable to correct instruments to match corrected survey (Ex. 31) |
| 2. Equal sharing of easement/creek-bank repair costs | Equitable because parties historically shared maintenance and defendant contributed to erosion; ordering equal split reasonable | Unreasonable to force equal split; challenged trial court’s equitable allocation | Court affirmed equal-cost order based on credible testimony of shared maintenance and defendant’s role in erosion |
| 3. Liability for flooding (diversion / culvert) | Berry denied causing or diverting water; argued floods were acts of God and culvert work did not alter flow | Bowling argued Berry’s culvert/acts caused flooding and erosion to their property | Court found competent evidence that floods (1997, 2010) were largely acts of God and no credible proof Berry caused the damage; trial court not reversed |
| 4. Trespass (driving outside metes & bounds / diverting water) | Berry argued corrected easement location places travel on gravel road within easement, so no trespass; no evidence of wrongful water diversion | Bowling argued Berry trespassed by using area supposedly outside the legal easement and by diverting water | Court held no trespass: with reformation the gravel driveway lies within the 30-foot easement and no proof Berry diverted water to cause damage |
Key Cases Cited
- Murray v. Lyon, 95 Ohio App.3d 215 (9th Dist.) (party may invoke equity to enforce an easement via injunction)
- Ohio Power Co. v. Bauer, 60 Ohio App.3d 57 (4th Dist.) (trial court has broad equitable authority to fashion division of property rights)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard explained)
- Castle v. Daniels, 16 Ohio App.3d 209 (2d Dist.) (reformation appropriate where deed resulted from mutual mistake)
- C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279 (Ohio) (judgments supported by competent, credible evidence will not be reversed)