Peters v. Emerald Hills Homeowners' Ass'n
109 A.3d 131
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2015Background
- In 1969 the Sheppards sold a 64-acre tract to a Posner-controlled entity but reserved Parcel 765 (≈1 acre) which lacked public road frontage; they also reserved a non-exclusive 50' Right-of-Way Parcel to Southview Road.
- In 2000 Posner recorded subdivision plats for the adjacent Emerald Hills development; one Plat depicted (a) Parcel 765, (b) the Right-of-Way Parcel, and (c) a small Triangular Parcel marked on the legend as an "ingress & egress easement for access to Parcel 765," and shaded as passive open space. Posner signed the Plat.
- In 2001 Posner and Posner, LLC recorded a Cross Easement Agreement granting reciprocal, non-exclusive access rights over open-space parcels to lot owners of the Greenridge and Emerald Hills subdivisions; Parcel 765 was not a lot within those subdivisions.
- Title to the passive open space parcels (including the Triangular Parcel and Right-of-Way Parcel) passed to the Emerald Hills Homeowners’ Association in 2006 by deed referring to the plats. The Association had constructive notice of the Plat.
- The Peterses purchased Parcel 765 in 2009, sought a county permit in 2011 to build a driveway across the Triangular Parcel to Streamview Court, and began construction. The Association sued for declaratory relief; the trial court granted summary judgment for the Association, holding no express or implied easement and that the Cross Easement Agreement extinguished any plat-based easement.
Issues
| Issue | Peterses' Argument | Association's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the recorded subdivision Plat created an express easement benefiting Parcel 765 | Plat text, signature, and identification of dominant/servient parcels satisfy Statute of Frauds as a memorandum creating an express easement | Plat is not a deed; Dubrowin is distinguishable; plat lacks typical granting language and may not show intent to convey | Court held Plat did create an express ingress-and-egress easement benefitting Parcel 765 (Plat satisfied RP §5-103/Kobrine criteria) |
| Whether the 2001 Cross Easement Agreement extinguished or altered the plat-based easement | Cross Easement Agreement either does not apply to Parcel 765 or affirmatively recognizes easements on listed plats | Cross Easement Agreement granted reciprocal rights among subdivision lot owners and did not intend to benefit adjacent Parcel 765; it may supersede prior plat rights | Court held the Cross Easement Agreement did not extinguish the plat-based easement and did not intend Parcel 765 as a beneficiary |
| Whether the Association took title free of the easement or without notice | Peterses: deed to Association referenced plats, so Association had constructive notice of easement | Association: acquisition and instruments do not create easement in favor of non-lot Parcel 765 | Court held Association took with constructive notice (plat incorporated) and could not avoid the easement |
| Whether an express easement must be created by deed rather than other writing (scope of Dubrowin/Kobrine) | Peterses: Dubrowin exception allows non-deed memorandum (including signed plat) to satisfy Statute of Frauds; Kobrine criteria are met here | Association: Brehm rule and CJP §5-901 limit application; need evidence of agreement/typical grant language; plats are not conveying instruments | Court held Dubrowin exception applies; Kobrine criteria satisfied by this Plat (owner signature, identified parcels, clear easement purpose), so deed not required |
Key Cases Cited
- Dubrowin v. Schremp, 248 Md. 166 (1967) (memorandum satisfying Statute of Frauds can create an express easement even if not a deed)
- Kobrine v. Metzger, 380 Md. 620 (2004) (plat can create an express easement only if it meets Statute of Frauds criteria: owner signature, identified dominant/servient estates, and clear description of rights)
- Brehm v. Richards, 152 Md. 126 (1927) (general principle that interests in land typically must be created in manner prescribed by recording statutes)
- Bruce v. Dyer, 309 Md. 421 (1987) (distinguishing deeds and other instruments; separation agreement did not effect a present conveyance absent typical granting language)
- USA Cartage v. Baer, 429 Md. 199 (2012) (easements may be created by express grant, reservation, or implication)
- Lindsay v. Annapolis Roads Property Owners Ass'n, 431 Md. 274 (2013) (reference to a recorded plat in a deed incorporates that plat into the deed, giving constructive notice)