James W. Hynes v. Milton B. Middleton, Margaret W. Middleton, Ted L. Calhoun, Elizabeth R. Calhoun, Brian Gilbert, and Jacalyn Gilbert
CL-2023-0533
| Ala. Civ. App. | Jun 27, 2025Background
- Hynes, owner of two lakefront parcels at The Preserve at Stoney Ridge, sought a declaration and ejectment regarding boat slips and a pedestrian easement granting access to nonwaterfront owners (Middletons, Calhouns, Gilberts).
- Rodan Land (prior developer) granted a pedestrian easement across lot D to Stoney Ridge AL, and Stoney Ridge AL granted boat-slip licenses to the defendants for the use of the dock attached to lot D.
- Hynes acquired lot D subject to recorded easements and sought to terminate defendants' access to both the pedestrian easement and boat slips, arguing insufficient property interests.
- The trial court ruled the easement and licenses were valid, giving defendants continued rights; Hynes appealed.
- Appellate court reviewed whether the easement was appurtenant or in gross, and whether boat-slip licenses were transferable or revocable.
- The court ultimately held the pedestrian easement was an inalienable easement in gross (not appurtenant), and the boat-slip licenses were revocable.
Issues
| Issue | Hynes' Argument | Defendants' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature of Easement | Easement is not appurtenant; grantee never owned dominant estate | Valid easement between property owners by express conveyance | Easement is in gross, not appurtenant or transferable |
| Authority to Grant Boat-Slip Licenses | Only permit-holder (Rodan Land) could license; Stoney Ridge AL had no right | License agreements were valid and on record | Licenses are revocable, not binding on Hynes |
| Revocation of Boat-Slip Licenses | Licenses are revocable; lack of Alabama Power permission, no expenditure | Recorded agreements should be enforced | Hynes validly revoked licenses after taking title |
| Legal Notice/Equitable Estoppel | Notice of use insufficient to bind successor; lack of document disclosure | Hynes was on constructive and actual notice of easement/use | Knowledge did not subjugate Hynes' rights |
Key Cases Cited
- West Town Plaza Assocs., Ltd. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 619 So. 2d 1290 (Ala. 1993) (defining easement as an interest in land)
- Weeks v. Wolf Creek Indus., Inc., 941 So. 2d 263 (Ala. 2006) (discussing easement appurtenant vs. in gross)
- Louis Pizitz Dry Goods Co. v. Penney, 241 Ala. 602 (Ala. 1942) (articulating characteristics of easements)
- Bruner v. Walker, 366 So. 2d 695 (Ala. 1978) (permissive use without easement does not bind successors)
- Camp v. Milam, 291 Ala. 12 (Ala. 1973) (licenses generally revocable unless estoppel applies)
- Blackburn v. Lefebvre, 976 So. 2d 482 (Ala. Civ. App. 2007) (nature of boat-slip agreements as licenses)