Summary
The Supreme Court of Virginia addressed certified questions concerning the validity of a negative easement in gross created in 1973 for land conservation and historic preservation. The Court held that Virginia law recognized such easements as valid in 1973, relying on Code § 55-6, the Open-Space Land Act, and constitutional public policy favoring conservation and preservation. Because the first question was dispositive, the Court did not address the second certified question.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Virginia law in 1973 recognized as valid a negative easement in gross granted to a private party for land conservation and historic preservation.
- Whether a group of private property owners could grant coordinated restrictions for land conservation and historic preservation when the parcels were not transferred by a common grantor, the grants were made in consideration of similar grants, and the grantee owned no benefited property.
Holdings
- Virginia law in 1973 recognized as valid a negative easement in gross created for the purpose of land conservation and historic preservation.
Key quotations
“For these reasons, we hold that the law of Virginia in 1973 did recognize as valid a negative easement in gross created for the purpose of land conservation and historic preservation.” (270 Va. at 81)
“The fact that such easements were being conveyed without these benefits and incentives prior to the enactment of the VCEA does not support Blackman's contention that these easements were invalid at that time.” (270 Va. at 80)
Factual background
In 1973, D.L. and Frances Atkins granted Historic Green Springs, Inc. an assignable easement in gross restricting the use of Eastern View Farm for land conservation and historic preservation. In 1978, Historic Green Springs conveyed its portfolio of easements to the United States, with the original grantors consenting to the conveyance. After purchasing the property in 2002, Peter Blackman sought to remove the manor house's porch, replace siding, and construct an addition without obtaining the National Park Service's approval, and he removed the porch.
Procedural history
Peter Blackman purchased Eastern View Farm subject to a 1973 easement requiring preservation of the manor house and certain outbuildings, with alterations requiring prior approval. After the National Park Service denied aspects of his renovation plans and Blackman removed the porch, the United States filed suit and obtained a temporary restraining order. The federal district court certified two questions to the Supreme Court of Virginia; the state court answered the first question and declined to reach the second because the first answer was dispositive.