Summary
The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed a trial court's allocation of riparian rights among neighboring waterfront property owners. The Court held that riparian rights must be apportioned under the Groner rule using a historic mean low-water line unaffected by manmade shoreline development, rather than the current altered shoreline. The Court also upheld the determination that the relevant deeds did not preclude the Kidds and Crowleys from asserting riparian rights.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court properly approved an allocation of riparian rights under the Groner rule using an approximated historic mean low-water line rather than the current mean low-water line after manmade development altered the shoreline.
- Whether the evidence supported the commissioner's location of the historic mean low-water line along the fixed rear lot lines shown on the revised subdivision plat and Kennedy survey.
- Whether the disputed triangular area of land belonged to the Carrs based on their deed's natural-boundary language.
- Whether the source deeds and later quitclaim provisions for the Kidd and Crowley properties precluded those owners from asserting riparian rights.
Holdings
- When a property's perimeter has been developed and the shoreline altered, riparian rights must be apportioned under the Groner rule as if the perimeter improvements, including fill materials, had not been made; the current mean low-water line therefore was properly disregarded.
- The evidence supported using the fixed, straight-line rear lot boundaries shown on the revised subdivision plat and Kennedy survey as an approximation of the historic 1908 mean low-water line.
- The commissioner properly found that the disputed approximately 639-square-foot triangular area was not part of the Carr property and fell within the Crowley riparian zone.
- The Kidd and Crowley properties' deeds did not preclude those owners from asserting riparian rights because the chain of title showed no clear and manifest retention or severance of those rights by the grantor.
Key quotations
“Thus, when a property's perimeter has been developed, thereby altering the property's shoreline, an apportionment of riparian rights under the Groner rule requires that those rights be determined as if the perimeter improvements, including the placement of fill materials, had not been made.” (261 Va. at 891)
“A riparian owner has the right to water frontage belonging by nature to his land, unless that right has been clearly and manifestly retained by the grantor in language appearing on the face of the deed.” (261 Va. at 893)
Factual background
The parties owned neighboring residential subdivision lots along a cove of Tanner's Creek in Norfolk and disputed the allocation of their riparian rights and the location of a proposed and existing pier. A concrete bulkhead, riprap, and fill had altered the Carr property's shoreline, moving it seaward from the shoreline reflected in the historic subdivision records. The commissioner relied on expert testimony and the 1908 revised subdivision plat to approximate the historic mean low-water line and allocated riparian rights using the Kennedy survey. The Carrs argued that the current mean low-water line should control, that a disputed triangular area belonged to them, and that the Kidds and Crowleys lacked riparian rights because of their deed language.
Procedural history
The Kidds sued the Crowleys to determine the parties' riparian rights and alleged trespass based on the Crowleys' existing pier. The Carrs intervened, arguing that the proposed settlement and Kennedy survey impaired their riparian rights. The trial court referred the matter to a commissioner in chancery, confirmed the commissioner's report recommending use of an approximated 1908 mean low-water line, and entered a final allocation of riparian rights. The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed.