Peck v. LANIER GOLF CLUB, INC.
315 Ga. App. 176
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Peck sues Lanier Golf Club, Inc. for declaratory judgment and injunction seeking an implied easement or implied restrictive covenant in Lanier's adjacent Canongate on Lanier golf course property.
- Lanier moved for summary judgment; trial court granted, Peck appeals arguing a genuine issue of material fact exists as to an implied easement.
- Canongate on Lanier subdivision was developed by multiple entities; Peck bought a lot in Section J with belief the golf course affected property value.
- Peck relied on marketing materials and plats showing proximity to the golf course; however, no recorded subdivision plat clearly designated the golf course.
- Peck’s purchase documents contained merger/disclaimer language denying any right to use the golf course; prior communications stated no membership or use rights would be granted.
- Lanier announced closure of the golf course in 2006 and ultimately closed it; Peck sought to enforce continued access but the court upheld summary judgment against him.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Peck established an implied easement via the common grantee/plat method. | Peck relied on a subdivision plat showing the golf course and paid more for the lot. | There is no recorded subdivision plat or clear designation of the golf course as part of Peck's lot; no common plan established. | No implied easement via common grantor; denial of summary judgment reversed not required; Lanier granted summary judgment on this claim. |
| Whether Peck established an implied easement via oral assurances. | Developers allegedly promised the golf course would remain, and Peck relied on that in purchasing. | Disclaimers and merger clause prevent reliance; no evidence of oral assurances forming part of the contract. | Summary judgment affirmed; reliance on oral assurances rejected as a matter of law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knotts Landing Corp. v. Lathem, 256 Ga. 321 (Ga. 1986) (oral assurances may create implied easement if part of a common plan)
- Forsyth County v. Martin, 279 Ga. 215 (Ga. 2005) (recorded plat and enhanced value support irrevocable easement claim)
- Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331 (Ga. 1976) (easements arise from recorded plats when lots are sold accordingly)
- Eardley v. McGreevy, 279 Ga. 562 (Ga. 2005) (unrecorded plat cannot establish implied easement)
- de Castro v. Durrell, 295 Ga. App. 194 (Ga. App. 2008) (unrecorded plat cannot support implied easement for subdivision)
- Novare Group v. Sarif, 290 Ga. 186 (Ga. 2011) (merger clause/preclusive reliance on representations not in contract)
- Griffin v. State Bank of Cochran, 312 Ga. App. 87 (Ga. App. 2011) (merger/disclaimer provisions bar reliance on alleged misrepresentations)
- Roth v. Connor, 235 Ga. App. 866 (Ga. App. 1998) (limitations on use by implication must be strictly construed; clear and beyond reasonable doubt)
- Walker v. Duncan, 236 Ga. 331 (Ga. 1976) (reiterated on common grantor/plat-based easement principle)