Carnahan v. Lewis
2012 WY 45
Wyo.2012Background
- PlatTable Mountain Ranches Fourth Filing included Mountain View Loop easement dedicated to public use.
- 1994 Griffiths affidavit attempted to vacate interior tract lines and the Mountain View Loop; county treated it as vacating.
- Lewises acquired surrounding acreage; Mountain View Loop traverses their property and the subdivision.
- 2003 Board denied replat that would vacate Mountain View Loop and replace it with a non-public access easement.
- 2007 Carnahans erected a fence blocking the easement; Lewises sued for declaratory/injunctive relief; 1994 affidavit later deemed ineffective; district court resolved remaining issues; Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to seek declaratory relief | Lewises have a legally protectable interest in the public easement. | Lewises lack possessory interest since County holds title in trust for the public. | Lewises had standing to pursue declaratory relief. |
| Timeliness under statute of limitations | Action not time-barred; harm occurred when access blocked in 2007. | Knowledge of vacatur/blocks triggered limitations earlier. | Not time-barred; limitations did not begin until 2007. |
| Laches defense | No inexcusable delay; controversy matured in 2007. | Delay prejudicial; Carnahans knew issues but purchased anyway. | Laches not barred; not applicable. |
| Effectiveness of Griffiths affidavit to vacate plat | Affidavit complied with no applicable statute; vacatur valid. | Affidavit did not meet statutory requirements; ineffective. | Affidavit ineffective; Mountain View Loop remains public easement. |
| Trespass claim viability | Plaintiffs seek interference with use of public easement, not exclusive possession. | Property rights dispute; trespass requires possessory interest. | Trespass claim vacated/covered by declaratory relief; not necessary to decide separately. |
Key Cases Cited
- Owsley v. Robinson, 65 P.3d 374 (Wyo. 2003) (distinguishes public easement standing and ownership interests)
- Ruby Drilling Co., Inc. v. Billingsly, 660 P.2d 377 (Wyo. 1983) (public easement standing; right to use vs. exclusive possession)
- Sare v. Sheridan County Bd. of County Comm'rs, 784 P.2d 593 (Wyo. 1989) (public road vacatur requires statutory compliance)
- Moorcroft v. Lang, 779 P.2d 1180 (Wyo. 1989) (authority to vacate subdivision streets post-sale and limitations on unilateral vacatur)
- Ultra Resources, Inc. v. Hartman, 226 P.3d 889 (Wyo. 2010) (standing, timeliness, and harm considerations in declaratory actions)