Miller v. Romanauski
2014 Ohio 1517
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Millers filed a declaratory judgment action seeking an easement for ingress/egress to their Fernhall Road property within Hall Acres subdivision.
- Strakas own adjacent sublots 50 and 51; Fernhall Road is undedicated, while John Road is a public, dedicated road used by Strakas.
- Original Hall Acres plat (circa 1927) showed Fernhall Road and Thornbrook Boulevard as roads; deeds reserved 25 feet for Fernhall Road and Thornbrook Boulevard for road construction.
- Root deeds conveyed land with language that the properties are “subject to all legal highways” and 25 feet off the south side for Fernhall Road, Proposed; this language was carried in subsequent deeds.
- Trial court granted summary judgment recognizing an express easement by reservation and an implied easement by necessity; later, a precise easement plat was recorded; on appeal, Strakas challenge the two theories.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an express easement by reservation exists. | Miller: root deeds expressly created an easement. | Straka: language is ambiguous and insufficient to grant an easement. | Yes; express easement by reservation exists. |
| Whether the easement is implied by necessity. | Millers: easement by necessity applies. | Strakas: cannot coexist with express easement; implied not required. | Harmless error; express easement binding makes implied unnecessary. |
| Whether the root deeds adequately created an easement despite Fernhall Road not being dedicated. | Millers: dedication not required for effective easement by grant. | Strakas: lack of dedication defeats easement. | No; root deeds expressly created an appurtenant easement. |
| Whether Strakas had notice of the easement in the chain of title. | Millers: constructive notice via root deeds in chain of title. | Strakas: their own deeds lacked the “25 feet” clause. | Strakas bound by root-deed language; notice established. |
Key Cases Cited
- Alban v. R.K. Co., 15 Ohio St.2d 229 (Ohio 1968) (defines easement concepts and creation by grant or implication)
- Warren v. Brenner, 89 Ohio App. 188 (9th Dist.1950) (easements appurtenant run with land)
- Clagg v. Baycliffs, 82 Ohio St.3d 277 (1998) (easements may arise from original plat and deeds without express language)
- Tiller v. Hinton, 19 Ohio St.3d 66 (1985) (easements by necessity are implied and cannot coincide with express grants)