81 A.3d 377
Me.2013Background
- In 1953 the Gregorys acquired land on Annabessacook Lake; Thelma Buch and her late husband began staying in cabins on the property in 1962.
- A 1969 subdivision plan shows a twenty-foot right-of-way between Lots B and C to the lake, intended for guest access to a main lodge.
- A 1970 subdivision plan added back lots behind the original ones and did not depict the 1969 right-of-way.
- From 1972 the McIntires developed the back lots and used the right-of-way for lake access until the mid- to late-1980s.
- Tisdale purchased two lots not shown on the 1969 plan (one shown on the 1970 plan); most deeds did not reference the right-of-way.
- Buch purchased Lots B and C in 1980 and 1991; postings in 2005–2006 restricted right-of-way use to adjacent lot owners; in 2010 Tisdale and others sued for declaration, injunctive relief, quiet title, and presumptive rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Paper Streets Act governs ownership of the right-of-way | Tisdale contends the Act does not apply to this right-of-way. | Buch argues the Act applies, giving her ownership to the centerline. | Yes; the Act applies and Buch owns to the centerline. |
| Whether a common scheme of development exists to impose restrictive covenants | Tisdale argues there is a general scheme reflecting a restrictive covenants framework. | Buch contends there is no such common scheme evidenced by the deeds/plans. | Record supports no common scheme; no implied covenants. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fournier v. Elliott, 2009 ME 25 (Me. 2009) (definition of 'proposed, unaccepted way' for Paper Streets Act purposes; not a paper street)
- Driscoll v. Mains, 2005 ME 52 (Me. 2005) (clarifies 'paper streets' vs. 'proposed, unaccepted ways')
- Thompson v. Pendleton, 1997 ME 127 (Me. 1997) (describes factors for common scheme doctrine)
- 3 W Partners v. Bridges, 651 A.2d 389 (Me. 1994) (defines common scheme implications and enforceability)
- Olson v. Albert, 523 A.2d 585 (Me. 1987) (no general scheme existed where few deeds contained relevant restrictions)
- Chase v. Burrell, 474 A.2d 180 (Me. 1984) (early framework for implied restrictions in subdivisions)
- Callahan v. Ganneston Park Dev. Corp., 245 A.2d 274 (Me. 1968) (sales by plan reference create private rights of way)
- Lamson v. Cote, 775 A.2d 1134 (Me. 2001) (interpretation of 33 M.R.S. § 469-A applicability)
- Brooks v. Carson, 48 A.3d 224 (Me. 2012) (context on Paper Streets Act clarification)