940 N.W.2d 55
Mich.2019Background
- In a June 18, 2015 consent judgment the defendants granted an easement across Parcel B from Vonda Lane "to the water’s edge" for ingress and egress and expressly allowed "temporary mooring and launching of watercraft, including by boat trailer," but prohibited docks/wharfs and non‑temporary mooring.
- Maniaci later sought to enforce the easement and requested permission to regrade Parcel B’s shoreline so a boat trailer could be backed to the water’s edge to launch boats.
- The Gladwin Circuit Court denied Maniaci’s motion; the Court of Appeals affirmed; the Michigan Supreme Court accepted the matter and issued a per curiam opinion in lieu of granting leave.
- Central legal questions were whether the easement’s scope includes backing a boat trailer to the water’s edge and whether regrading the shoreline is a permissible, necessary improvement to effectuate the easement.
- The Supreme Court held that the easement includes the right to bring a boat trailer to the water’s edge and that regrading the shoreline to permit launching by trailer is a necessary and permissible improvement; the Court reversed the Court of Appeals, vacated in part the circuit court order, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the easement includes backing a boat trailer to the water's edge | Maniaci: easement expressly allows launching "including by boat trailer," which necessarily includes bringing the trailer to the water's edge to set the boat afloat | Diroff/Siler: allowing launching doesn’t require backing a trailer fully to the water’s edge; feasibility limitations don’t expand the easement | Yes. "Launch" means to set a boat in the water; that requires trailer access to the water's edge, so the easement includes that right |
| Whether Maniaci may regrade the shoreline to permit trailer launching | Maniaci: regrading is necessary for the reasonable and proper enjoyment of the easement to permit launching by trailer | Diroff/Siler: such improvements may be unnecessary or unreasonably burden the servient estate and may constitute forbidden "damage to the surface" | Yes. Regrading is an improvement but is necessary to effectuate the permitted use; plaintiff may alter the shoreline as needed, subject to trial‑court oversight on scope and restoration issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Blackhawk Dev. Corp. v. Village of Dexter, 473 Mich 33 (2005) (easement holder may not make improvements unnecessary for effective use or that unreasonably burden the servient tenement)
- Little v. Kin, 468 Mich 699 (2003) (easement language is interpreted according to its unambiguous terms; extrinsic evidence not appropriate for unambiguous easements)
- Unverzagt v. Miller, 306 Mich 260 (1943) (conveyance of an easement carries all rights incident or necessary to reasonable enjoyment of the easement)