Reeves v. Godspeed Properties, LLC

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed a dispute over the creation and prescriptive extinguishment of an easement for ingress and egress near Fairbanks. The court held that the 1986 deed created a valid easement appurtenant and that Alaska law permits partial extinguishment by prescription. It concluded that a gold processing plant extinguished only the portion of the easement on which it stood, while the evidence was insufficient to extinguish the entire easement.

Holdings

1. The 1986 deed created a valid easement appurtenant benefiting the adjoining MS-1709 property. The misspelled or variant term “dedicatable” did not make the deed ambiguous, but the deed was ambiguous as to the benefited parcel, so the court properly considered surrounding circumstances and the parties' conduct.
2. Alaska law recognizes partial extinguishment of an easement through prescription. The standard is the same standard governing complete extinguishment: the servient owner's continuous, open, and notorious use must unreasonably interfere with the current or prospective use of the easement for the prescriptive period.
3. The gold-processing plant extinguished only the portion of the easement on which the permanent plant stood.
4. The evidence was insufficient to establish that gravel piles, berms, equipment, vehicles, conveyor belts, or other temporary mining activities continuously and unreasonably interfered with the entire remainder of the easement for the ten-year prescriptive period.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the 1986 deed created a valid easement appurtenant despite using the term “dedicatable” and failing to identify expressly the benefited parcel.
2. Whether the mining plant and related activities continuously, openly, and notoriously unreasonably interfered with the easement so as to extinguish it by prescription.
3. Whether Alaska law recognizes partial extinguishment of an easement by prescription.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded