514 P.3d 1263
Alaska2022Background
- A 1977 deed from Vernon to Jack granted a broad easement over Vernon’s lots to the then-owner (Jack), "without restriction," to use the existing roadway for ingress and egress and to "gain access to adjacent or adjoining lands." The road leads from the Glenn Highway across property and the Matanuska River toward the Matanuska Glacier.
- Jack (and successors) historically used the road for a commercial glacier tourism operation; William Stevenson later leased and operated glacier-tour businesses and maintained the road (grading, snowplowing, clearing rockslides).
- Mark Wayson purchased parcels that include the north portion of the road; he complained of foundation, safety, and debris issues and posted a "No Glacier Access" sign at the road entrance.
- Stevenson sued for declaratory and injunctive relief; the superior court (after preliminary relief and a trial) held Stevenson may use the easement for his commercial glacier business, that his maintenance activities were reasonable (and only marginally widened the road), and that Wayson’s "No Glacier Access" sign unreasonably interfered with the easement.
- The superior court dismissed Wayson’s defamation counterclaims based on absolute privilege, and awarded $50,000 in attorney’s fees to Stevenson. The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed in full.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wayson) | Defendant's Argument (Stevenson) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of easement: commercial use | The 1977 deed should not be read to permit commercial glacier-tour operations or expand the easement’s scope. | Deed grants the right to "use without restriction" and to access adjacent lands; extrinsic evidence shows parties intended commercial use. | Deed unambiguously (and in any event by extrinsic evidence) allows commercial use for glacier access. |
| Legality / public policy / trespass risk | Use for commercial glacier tours is illegal or contrary to public policy because it may have involved trespass on CIRI lands. | The easement itself is valid; potential trespass on third-party lands does not render the servitude illegal or void; later lease with CIRI removed practical trespass risk. | Easement is not void for illegality or public policy concerns. |
| Road maintenance, width, and sign interference | Maintenance has impermissibly widened the road, damaged Wayson’s property, and justified the "No Glacier Access" sign to prevent trespass. | Maintenance (grading, plowing, clearing slides) is reasonably necessary; marginal widening incidental and permitted; sign interferes with commercial use. | Easement width not fixed; maintenance practices were reasonably necessary and did not unreasonably damage servient estate; "No Glacier Access" sign unreasonably interfered and was improperly posted. |
| Defamation & absolute privilege | Statements in Stevenson’s complaint (e.g., alleged public nudity) were false and defamatory; privilege should not shield improper allegations. | Statements made in pleadings and preliminaries to litigation are absolutely privileged if related to the proceeding. | Defamation claims dismissed: allegedly defamatory litigation statements were absolutely privileged; other alleged statements to police were not adjudicated on the merits (post-trial motion untimely). |
| Attorney’s fees award | Fee award to Stevenson was improper; also alleged fraudulent billing by opposing counsel. | Stevenson prevailed on main issues and is entitled to fees under Civ. R. 82; court may address billing objections and adjust fee amount. | Trial court did not abuse discretion: Stevenson was prevailing party; $50,000 fee award affirmed (court reduced multiplier for some counsel conduct). |
Key Cases Cited
- Sykes v. Lawless, 474 P.3d 636 (Alaska 2020) (framework for deed interpretation and when to consider extrinsic evidence)
- Reeves v. Godspeed Props., LLC, 426 P.3d 845 (Alaska 2018) (discussion of easement in gross vs. appurtenant and related servitude rules)
- Labrenz v. Burnett, 218 P.3d 993 (Alaska 2009) (easement width fixed by instrument where deed is specific)
- Offshore Sys.-Kenai v. State, Dep’t of Transp. & Pub. Facilities, 282 P.3d 348 (Alaska 2012) (clear-error standard for factual findings and deed interpretation steps)
- Zamarello v. Yale, 514 P.2d 228 (Alaska 1973) (absolute privilege for statements made in judicial proceedings)
- BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc. v. State, Dep’t of Revenue, 327 P.3d 185 (Alaska 2014) (definition of "prevailing party" and standard for fee awards)