Smith v. County of Durham, 214 N.C. App. 423

Plaintiffs Mishew Smith, Robert Edwards, and Alton Smith own adjacent properties on the Little River in Durham County; Defendant County of Durham purchased the Cockleburr tract in 2008 to implement an open space plan.
An informal road crossing the Smith property connected to an existing Johnson Mill Road easement; a gate restricted access to Clement/Lee families.
In 1993 the Clements granted Mr. Lee a temporary timber easement that expired; a 1999 Final Plat of Subdivision & Easement Dedication depicted a 60' access easement crossing the Smith property.
Plaintiffs recorded the 1999 Final Plat with dedication statements; Defendant later sought to use the road to access its Cockleburr tract.
Defendant was denied access to the crossroad after its surveyor was refused entry to the Cockleburr tract.
The trial court granted Defendant summary judgment on the express-easement theory; Plaintiffs appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Final Plat created an express easement for public use	Smiths contend the plat only references a historic easement	Durham says the plat expressly dedicates the 60' road	Yes, express easement created
Whether others theories (prescription/implication/necessity) control, if any	Smiths rely solely on express dedication	Defendant may pursue alternative easements but not needed	Not necessary; express easement controls

Sampson v. City of Greensboro, 35 N.C.App. 148, 240 S.E.2d 502 (1978) (easement/dedication evidenced by plat grants right of public use)
Realty Co. v. Hobbs, 261 N.C.414, 135 S.E.2d 30 (1964) (right of lot owners to use streets not extinguished except by agreement or estoppel)
Musi v. Town of Shallotte, 200 N.C.App. 379, 684 S.E.2d 892 (2009) (summary judgment standard; no genuine issues of material fact)
Carcano v. JBSS, LLC, 200 N.C.App. 162, 684 S.E.2d 41 (2009) (summary judgment burden shifting)