Summary
The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's dismissal of a property owner's claims challenging a neighboring landowner's dock permit under the Lakeshore Protection Act. The court held that the dock did not interfere with navigational or recreational rights protected by the public trust doctrine, as alternative watercraft access remained available. Additionally, the court ruled that the plaintiff could not establish a prescriptive easement due to lack of exclusive use and that the nuisance claim failed because it depended on an unproven statutory violation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Did the District Court correctly dismiss Murphy Properties’ Lakeshore Protection Act claims against Painted Rocks and Lake County?
- Did the District Court correctly grant Painted Rocks summary judgment on Murphy Properties’ prescriptive easement and nuisance claims?
Holdings
- The district court correctly dismissed the Lakeshore Protection Act claims because the dock did not interfere with navigation or lawful recreation under the public trust doctrine and the county’s decision was not arbitrary or capricious.
- The district court correctly granted summary judgment because Murphy Properties failed to establish the exclusive‑use element required for a prescriptive easement, and the nuisance claim depended on a failed Lakeshore Protection Act claim.
Key quotations
“We affirm the District Court’s rulings in favor of Lake County and Painted Rocks on all claims. Lake County complied with the requirements of the Lakeshore Protection Act when it issued the permit. Painted Rocks’ dock does not interfere with navigation or lawful recreation because Murphy Properties does not have a right to access the cove in its eighteen‑foot ski boat when access remains otherwise unimpeded.” (¶33)
Factual background
Murphy Properties and Painted Rocks own adjoining shoreline on Flathead Lake. Painted Rocks obtained a county permit and constructed a dock on its property. Murphy Properties claimed the dock interfered with its ability to navigate the cove with an eighteen‑foot ski boat, asserted a prescriptive easement over the cove, and alleged the dock was a nuisance. The county and Painted Rocks argued the dock complied with all statutory and regulatory requirements.
Procedural history
Murphy Properties sued Painted Rocks and Lake County asserting violations of the Lakeshore Protection Act, a nuisance claim, and a declaratory judgment for a prescriptive easement. The district court dismissed the Act claim and granted summary judgment on the easement and nuisance claims. Murphy Properties appealed.