Schweitzer v. Salamatof Air Park Subdivision Owners, Inc.
2012 Alas. LEXIS 86
| Alaska | 2012Background
- November 1998 plat created Salamatof Air Park, an 88-acre subdivision with Lots 1-17, Tracts A–C, and airport-related facilities.
- February 1999 earnest money agreement for Lot 15; Easement Agreement and separate right-of-way easement later recorded in March–April 1999; CCRs recorded.
- Craig Schweitzer and Melinda Schweitzer obtained Lot 14 and Lot 15 interests; Craig drafted the Easement Agreement.
- Craig developed float plane basins; dispute arose over Tract A–1 common areas and Craig’s use rights.
- Association claimed subdivision was a de facto common interest community; trial court found Easement Agreement conveyed non-exclusive common-area access and that no priority rights existed.
- Judgments awarded the Association damages and attorney’s fees; Craig’s appeal was moot on main issues but preserved fee-question review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the Easement Agreement grant Craig priority rights? | Craig argued the Easement Agreement provides special, priority rights to common areas. | Association contends the Easement Agreement only grants non-exclusive access like CCRs. | No priority rights granted; contract interpreted to non-exclusive access. |
| Is Craig's appeal moot, and who is prevailing for fees? | Craig maintains standing on property-rights issues and seeks fee relief. | Foreclosures moot Craig’s rights; standing exists only to pursue fee determination. | Craig's appeal moot on main issues; prevailing party for fees is the Association. |
| Did the Easement Agreement convey priority rights to areas already dedicated to the public? | Craig claims continued rights despite dedication. | Association argues dedication to public confers title/trust; Craig cannot obtain priority. | Easement could not convey priority rights in dedicated rights-of-way; dedication vests title in public. |
| Was the Association the prevailing party for attorney’s fees? | Craig argues fees should favor him if partial success occurred. | Association prevailed on main issue; fees appropriate. | Association affirmed as prevailing party; fee award sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dias v. State, Dept. of Transportation & Public Facilities, 000 P.3d 000 (Alaska 2010) (three-step approach to easement interpretation)
- State v. Simpson, 397 P.2d 288 (Alaska 1964) (title to streets created by dedication held by municipality in trust for the public)
- Swift v. Kniffen, 706 P.2d 296 (Alaska 1985) (assignment of error standards and related principles)
- Fairbanks Fire Fighters Ass'n, Local 1324 v. City of Fairbanks, 48 P.3d 1165 (Alaska 2002) (cited for standards on appellate review and policy considerations)