McCrorie v. Franz
2016 MT 313N
| Mont. | 2016Background
- Ben and Myra McCrorie own unimproved timberland near West Glacier; their parcel became surrounded by land later owned by Arlon Franz.
- A disputed private shortcut connects Belton Stage Road to Grizzly Spur Road (a BNSF private road); McCrories used this shortcut to access their property and maintained it (clearing, gravel, snowplowing) while building a house (2008–2012).
- McCrories sued Franz seeking a prescriptive easement (and alternatively easement by implication and by estoppel); Franz acquired the surrounding property in 2014 and was an absentee owner.
- At a bench trial the District Court granted Franz judgment as a matter of law after the McCrories' case-in-chief, finding they failed to prove the open, notorious, adverse element (clear and convincing standard) and also failed on implied-easement and estoppel theories.
- The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, applying bench-trial substantial-evidence review for findings of fact and correctness review for legal conclusions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McCrories proved a prescriptive easement (open, notorious, adverse, continuous 5 yrs) | Their long, visible use and maintenance of the road satisfied open, notorious, adverse use sufficient for prescriptive easement | Use did not give Franz actual notice; absentee ownership and lack of owner knowledge defeats open/notorious; no clear and convincing proof | Court held McCrories failed to prove open and notorious use by clear and convincing evidence; judgment for Franz affirmed |
| Whether knowledge of neighbor (McAtee) imputes to Franz (agency) | McAtee’s use and alleged relationship with Franz meant McAtee’s knowledge should be imputed to Franz | No evidence of an agency relationship; testimony was speculative and contradicted; knowledge not imputed | Court found no record support for agency; imputation of notice failed |
| Whether an easement by implication exists (unity of title) | The parcels were once part of a common homestead (Pete Postle) so an implied easement arose | McCrories did not prove unity of ownership or when parcels were divided | Court held unity of ownership not established; implied easement fails |
| Whether easement by estoppel applies (misrepresentation/concealment) | Conduct/representations by predecessor owners justified reliance and estoppel | No showing Franz misrepresented or concealed material facts | Court held no evidence of requisite misrepresentation; estoppel fails; punitive damages unavailable |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. Costco Wholesale, 336 Mont. 105 (discussing standard of review for judgment as a matter of law) (bench/jury trial distinctions noted)
- Heller v. Gremaux, 311 Mont. 178 (establishing elements and clear-and-convincing standard for prescriptive easement)
- Combs-Demaio Living Trust v. Kilby Butte Colony, Inc., 326 Mont. 334 (open and notorious requires assertion of right that notifies owner)
- Kurtzenacker v. Davis Surveying, Inc., 365 Mont. 71 (bench-trial review: findings tested for substantial credible evidence; conclusions of law reviewed for correctness)
- Wolf v. Owens, 340 Mont. 74 (unity of ownership requirement for easement by implication)
- Kelly v. Wallace, 292 Mont. 129 (elements for easement by estoppel include misrepresentation or concealment)