Mrs Bridges
Member
What is the name of your state? Maine
My parents (as joint tenants) sold the far corner of their property to long-time family friends. This non-waterfront property was across the street from the river, however, my parents also owned the waterfront property which was across the street from the land they sold to their friends. My parents granted a right of way to their friends, and this is what the deed says:
"Also granting a right of way to the wharf on the shore of the Kennebec River for the purpose of ingress or egress to the wharf to maintain a float, over other land now or formerly of John Doe and Jane Doe (more particularly described as Lot 9, on Map 99, Wharf Area, Property Map, City of Bath, prepared by James W. Sewall Co., Old Town, Maine, on file in the Assessors' office, City of Bath, Maine."
The long-time family friends have died, and their daughter sold the property. My dad has died, and my mother deeded the family property to me. The new owners disagree with me about what the deeded right of way legally entitles them to do.
My understanding is that since the deed specifically states the right of way purpose as ingress or egress, this means they may walk over my land to get to the wharf, and then down to the end of the wharf where they are allowed to attach a runway and float to the wharf.
Question 1: Am I correct in thinking that the legal definition of ingress and egress means entrance and exit, and that these terms describe a right to walk over my land, as opposed to the right to stay on my land for an extended period of time, for some purpose other than going to or from the wharf for the purpose of getting to their float?
Although the right of way is not specified in the deed by width, length, or metes and bounds, my parents' friends used the same foot path in going to their float and boat over the years. While I was out of town, and without my foreknowledge or permission, my new neighbors had a boom truck come onto my land in a place outside of the foot path, in a place where our old family friends never went. They said they had a right to do this because they were in the process of launching their float, and the deed says that they can "maintain a float." Just a week earlier I paid a contractor $1450 to grade and loam the area, and of course the boom truck ruined this.
My understanding is that the phrase "to maintain a float" indicates their right to attach a float to the wharf which is on my land, and that it describes the purpose of the ingress or egress to the wharf. So technically, during the off-season when there is no float there, they would not have a legitimate purpose for ingress or egress to the wharf (for example, if they wanted to do bird watching, or fishing from there.)
Their interpretation of "to maintain a float" is that they have the right to store their float and runway on my property. Also, that they have the right to launch and retrieve their float from my property (this can be done down the street at the public landing), using whatever process and heavy equipment they choose. I think they also believe that they can haul their float onto my property and perform repairs or "maintenance", because this qualifies as "maintaining a float."
Question 2: What is the definition of the phrase "to maintain a float" in the context of the language of the deed?
Question 3: Does my neighbor's action with the boom truck, and the five or six men he brought onto my property to assist in this activity, constitute trespass?
Incidentally, my mother, one of the original grantors of the right of way, is still alive. She was at my house and witnessed the boom truck incident and was extremely upset by it, inasmuch as this was something that our family friends never would have done.
Thank you in advance for any clarifications that you can offer.What is the name of your state?
My parents (as joint tenants) sold the far corner of their property to long-time family friends. This non-waterfront property was across the street from the river, however, my parents also owned the waterfront property which was across the street from the land they sold to their friends. My parents granted a right of way to their friends, and this is what the deed says:
"Also granting a right of way to the wharf on the shore of the Kennebec River for the purpose of ingress or egress to the wharf to maintain a float, over other land now or formerly of John Doe and Jane Doe (more particularly described as Lot 9, on Map 99, Wharf Area, Property Map, City of Bath, prepared by James W. Sewall Co., Old Town, Maine, on file in the Assessors' office, City of Bath, Maine."
The long-time family friends have died, and their daughter sold the property. My dad has died, and my mother deeded the family property to me. The new owners disagree with me about what the deeded right of way legally entitles them to do.
My understanding is that since the deed specifically states the right of way purpose as ingress or egress, this means they may walk over my land to get to the wharf, and then down to the end of the wharf where they are allowed to attach a runway and float to the wharf.
Question 1: Am I correct in thinking that the legal definition of ingress and egress means entrance and exit, and that these terms describe a right to walk over my land, as opposed to the right to stay on my land for an extended period of time, for some purpose other than going to or from the wharf for the purpose of getting to their float?
Although the right of way is not specified in the deed by width, length, or metes and bounds, my parents' friends used the same foot path in going to their float and boat over the years. While I was out of town, and without my foreknowledge or permission, my new neighbors had a boom truck come onto my land in a place outside of the foot path, in a place where our old family friends never went. They said they had a right to do this because they were in the process of launching their float, and the deed says that they can "maintain a float." Just a week earlier I paid a contractor $1450 to grade and loam the area, and of course the boom truck ruined this.
My understanding is that the phrase "to maintain a float" indicates their right to attach a float to the wharf which is on my land, and that it describes the purpose of the ingress or egress to the wharf. So technically, during the off-season when there is no float there, they would not have a legitimate purpose for ingress or egress to the wharf (for example, if they wanted to do bird watching, or fishing from there.)
Their interpretation of "to maintain a float" is that they have the right to store their float and runway on my property. Also, that they have the right to launch and retrieve their float from my property (this can be done down the street at the public landing), using whatever process and heavy equipment they choose. I think they also believe that they can haul their float onto my property and perform repairs or "maintenance", because this qualifies as "maintaining a float."
Question 2: What is the definition of the phrase "to maintain a float" in the context of the language of the deed?
Question 3: Does my neighbor's action with the boom truck, and the five or six men he brought onto my property to assist in this activity, constitute trespass?
Incidentally, my mother, one of the original grantors of the right of way, is still alive. She was at my house and witnessed the boom truck incident and was extremely upset by it, inasmuch as this was something that our family friends never would have done.
Thank you in advance for any clarifications that you can offer.What is the name of your state?