Subject: Re: [Town Meeting] Article 20/55 Venner Road Information

[KazChaz at aol.com]

A number of folks asked related questions, so I'm replying to the whole  
list, with apologies for not answering each question. I
 
There are many ways an easement can arise on your property, and as  many ways 
that same easement can become extinguished over time. There is a huge  body 
of complex law with regard to the creation and dissolution of easements.  
However, when a town draws exterior lines that go through your land, there  is 
nothing in the statutory framework for doing so that describes those actions  as 
the creation of an easement. They are what they are: exterior lines up to  
which a road can be widened. It is by the words of the statute, not by creation  
of a common law easement, that the owner of the land affected by the  line is 
prevented from building. The statutes  that allow this also  allow for the 
erasure of the lines by vote of town meeting. No vote of town  meeting is needed 
to extinguish an easement.
 
To me,  a complicating factor is that, God knows why, the Town seems  to have 
in 1942 issued an Order of Taking, in which they describe what they took  as 
an easement, without any necessity for describing it that way. So if the town  
took an easement, would a court see the exterior lines as a common law 
easement?  If so, would the doctrine of "abandonment of purpose" apply, and result 
in a  ruling that the lines are no longer valid? There are lots of paid-for 
easements  that have become extinguished over time, so the mere fact that the 
towm paid for  it 60 years ago is probably not relevant. 
 
As to whether the abutters have any rights to damages arising from  
abandonment of the exterior lines, I can find no case on it. The measure of  damages 
would probably be the diminution of value in the land, same as a Chapter  79 
taking. To me it seems unlikely that any recovery would be had,  because the 
"convenience" damages (loss of what? open space, sight lines?)  are not cognizable 
under any legal theory I can determine, except as they might  diminish value. 
How would they prove their homes are less valuable just  because the exterior 
lines were abandoned, and another home was built nearby? If  would be 
different if abandonment of the exterior lines meant they could no  longer get to 
their homes, couldn't get municipal services delivered, lost the  use of a piece 
of their land, etc.  
 
Anyway, I'm done for now.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/townmeeting/attachments/20060511/90264c41/attachment.htm