Carla Christine Stone v. Green Hill Civic Association, Inc., et al.

Summary

The Rhode Island Supreme Court reviewed a summary judgment concerning whether defendants had acquired a prescriptive easement over an oceanfront beach. The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the beach use was permissive, adverse, and under a claim of right, as well as regarding acquiescence, implied dedication, and custom. The court sustained the appeal, vacated the summary judgment, and remanded for trial.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed concerning whether defendants' use of the beach was permissive and whether it was adverse to Stone's property rights.
2. A claimant seeking an easement by prescription must establish actual, open, notorious, hostile, and continuous use under a claim of right for at least ten years, and the relevant elements must be proved by clear and satisfactory evidence.
3. The issues of acquiescence, implied dedication, and alleged customary servitude were also inappropriate for summary-judgment resolution because they required factual findings, and the defendants cited no legal basis for the proposed emerging customary-servitude doctrine.

Questions Presented

1. Whether summary judgment was proper when conflicting evidence created genuine issues of material fact concerning whether defendants' beach use was permissive or adverse.
2. Whether factual disputes existed concerning defendants' claim of a prescriptive easement, including whether their use was under a claim of right and whether they committed objective acts of ownership adverse to the record owner.
3. Whether the issues of acquiescence, implied dedication, and customary servitude could be resolved on summary judgment.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded