Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 58
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    Hey I replied with some facts of the "case" however my comment is being moderated. I may have sent it twice sorry.

    Looks like it got lost I will write it up again tomorrow.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,220

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    Yes, I do, at least better than you. Littoral rights do not apply to flowing navigable inland waterways. .
    Well to start with Ten Mile River is not a navigable inland waterway. It is a stream that empties into the Hudson river. It's not classified as navigable. I guess the word river got you confused.

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    And unless the owner granting the easement owned the land that now abuts the waterway, they could not have granted access to the waterway across another’s property regardless of any rights they held. .Oh, and littoral rights aren’t granted by easement.
    Not so. If someone has an easement that grants them access to a body of water they have littoral rights.

    A riparian proprietor is one who owns land on the bank of a river. (See Mettler v. Ames Realty Co., 61 Mont. 152.) Corresponding to riparian proprietors on a stream or a small pond are littoral proprietors on a sea or lake. But riparian is also used coextensively with littoral. (Commonwealth v. Alger, 7 Cush. [61 Mass.] 53; 940*940 City of Boston v. Lecraw, 17 How. [58 U. S.] 426.) In general terms riparian rights connote the right and profit to the owner of the upland arising from its connection with the water such as the easement of passage and use, subject however to governmental regulation for the improvement of navigation. (Matter of City of New York [West 205th St.], 240 N.Y. 68.) Generally speaking such rights are: (1) use of water for general purposes as bathing and domestic use; (2) wharf out to navigability; (3) access to navigable waters. (See Hilt v. Weber, 252 Mich. 198; City of New York v. Wilson & Co., 278 N.Y. 86.)
    Quote Quoting arcticranger
    View Post

    One neighbor across the former lake bought the lake bed and is denying us access to the Ten Mile River even though all our deeds have easements granting access to the former lake. .



    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    And your explanation is not one of littoral rights. It is still based on riparian rights. We aren’t talking about a static body of water such as a land confined lake or pond. It’s a river. .
    The name calls it a river but if you bothered to do some research you would have found that is but a stream. And even if the lake was man made, the people that own property at the water's edge still have littoral rights.


    While the rights of owners bordering a pond or lake created by a dam are generally not the same as the riparian (or littoral) rights of those adjoining a natural body of water, the circumstances surrounding the creation and use of an artificial body of water may under some circumstances give rise to rights similar to owners of property on the shoreline of a natural body of water (see Alderson v Fatlan, 231 Ill 2d 311, 319-323, 898 NE2d 595, 600-602 [2008]; Tarlock, Water Rights & Resources 3:25, 3:26 [2008]; cf. City of Syracuse v Stacey, 169 NY 231, 245 [1901] ["the value of water depends largely upon surrounding circumstances"]). "Simply put, in some cases, where the usage of the artificial body of water has long been settled, it may be appropriate to treat the artificial body as the legal equivalent of a natural one" (Alderson v Fatlan, 231 Ill 2d at 322, 898 NE2d at 602; see Hammond v Antwerp Light & Power Co., 132 Misc 786, 797-798 [1928]; cf. Townsend v McDonald, 12 NY 381, 390 [1855]).

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    Littoral rights are rights granted by law. The right rights granted by easement are not littoral nor riparian rights as the servient tenant cannot grant nor deny rights afforded by law to a specific class.
    The properties that are at the water's edge have littoral rights as a matter of law. But the courts have ruled that a property with an easement to access to the water's edge also have littoral rights.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,535

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    Quote Quoting budwad
    View Post
    Well to start with Ten Mile River is not a navigable inland waterway. It is a stream that empties into the Hudson river. It's not classified as navigable. I guess the word river got you confused.
    if you seriously wish me to address this, you need to stop your bullshit. I can refute your statement but won’t bother if this is merely an attempt to engage me to argue.



    Not so. If someone has an easement that grants them access to a body of water they have littoral rights.
    again, I can refute this claim but won’t do so until you assure me this is a valid attempt to engage a discussion and not simply a “i told you so” act.











    The name calls it a river but if you bothered to do some research you would have found that is but a stream. And even if the lake was man made, the people that own property at the water's edge still have littoral rights.
    ibid






    The properties that are at the water's edge have littoral rights as a matter of law. But the courts have ruled that a property with an easement to access to the water's edge also have littoral rights.
    ibid

    so, the ball is in your court. If you wish to actually engage in a discussion, I can do so. If you simply wish to argue, I have no desire to do so.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    OK so my post did get lost I'll try again.

    buwad has the history of Luxton Lake correct. Hey man who are you and how did you know all that?

    The dam was dynamited in 1981 and the lake drained leaving the river as before. The community unsuccessfully sued a construction firm for breaking the dam. The lakebed went to tax auction a few times and in 1992 was bought by the current owner.

    Regarding the easement all deeds in the community have this language:

    All that parcel of land < description of parcel being purchased >

    TOGETHER with a perpetual easement in and to Luxton Lake for all purposes of fishing, boating and bathing over and upon the "Beach and Recreation Area" as shown upon a map entitled "Lakeridge Estates" filed in the Sullivan County Clerks office on November 5th 1981 as Map no 887.

    TOGETHER with the right to keep and maintain a boat on Luxton Lake.

    TOGETHER with the right the use the "Clubhouse" described on a map of "Lakeridge Estates", subject however to an annual fee payable to the seller herein or to a Homeowners Association to be formed for the purpose of maintaining said recreation area and clubhouse < description of fee >.

    The use of the Clubhouse shall be at the sole option of Davis and Pearl S. Hunter and they have no obligation whatsoever to join the clubhouse.



    I think Davis Hunter owned the lake and surrounding land at this point, 1981, prior to the draining and subsequent tax foreclosure. I need to get this map 887 to see what "Beach and Recreation Area" refers to. It may refer to a 30+ acre strip of land along the western side of the former lake which Hunter called "community land". I'll attach a link to a map in a following post. I don't see a way to upload images that aren't from a website.

    My questions are:

    1) what do our easements to the "Beach and Recreation Area" mean today?

    2) what rights do we have to the river which now flows through the privately owned lakebed?

    I don't think Ten Mile River is legally navigable. Parts of it are very deep with wild rapids - there have been a number of drownings at boy scout camps - while other parts of very shallow and narrow. But it has "protected" status in NYS whatever that means. We do still fish and canoe the deeper parts here, even though the lakebed owner opposes it.

    To be fair here, she fought hard to get the dam rebuilt in the 90s and was treated badly by the community. I don't blame her for feeling negatively toward some of them. I also share my alma mater with her!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,535

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    The history of Luxton lake is readily accesssible on the Internet. There has been a documentary made about the lake


    Luxton lake no longer exists. Easement rights affording use of the lake do not automatically extend to the remaining river. While there are situations where the rights might be extended and situations where the easement holder may be able to sue to have the rights extended, any rights based on the easement and the rights of the servient tenant would need to be reviewed to be able to determine where they stand now

    in your situation, your rights specifically allow for access to and use of a specific “beach and reservation area” as shown on a map which happens to be adjacent to a now non existent lake. That in conjunction with the rights afforded those with access to a navigable waterway allowed you to use the lake waters. You can go and use the defined beach and recreation area still. That doesn’t necessarily allow you to cross the now dry lakebed, which is owned by a party that is neither the original grantors of your easement or their successor (as I understand your description and as supported by the fact the lakebed was a separate tax parcel able to be auctioned independently of the adjacent land also being the servient tenement of your easement) to access the remaining waterway. You need to refer to the map to determine if the beach and recreation area included an area that would allow you access to the remaining river.


    You have a right to boat on Luxton Lake. There is no lake so that right is meaningless.







    Budwads argument regarding navigability actually works against you. Given the current owner of the entire lakebed controls access on both sides of the waterway, the law is clear you have no right to cross their lands to access the waterway without some legal right not presented here and it not being considered navigable removes any right to use the waterway within their property boundaries even if you could access the water.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    253

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    Quote Quoting arcticranger
    View Post
    My questions are:

    1) what do our easements to the "Beach and Recreation Area" mean today?

    2) what rights do we have to the river which now flows through the privately owned lakebed?
    I don't think anyone here can answer that. I do expect a court case to answer those questions to take years and will be rather expensive.

    Are there even any precedents for this situation in NY?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    There are a lot of Ten Mile Rivers. This one starts at Lake Kabau in Tylerville NY and empties into the Delaware in Narrowsburg NY. It feeds about 7 lakes along the way.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,535

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    I
    Quote Quoting arcticranger
    View Post
    There are a lot of Ten Mile Rivers. This one starts at Lake Kabau in Tylerville NY and empties into the Delaware in Narrowsburg NY. It feeds about 7 lakes along the way.
    Ya lost me. There is only one Tenmile river that was the source waters for Luxton lake.

    But what is is your point?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    budwad stated the Ten Mile emptied into the Hudson, I was just correcting him. That TMR is a different river.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,535

    Default Re: Does the Owner of a Lakebed Own the River That Feeds It

    Quote Quoting arcticranger
    View Post
    budwad stated the Ten Mile emptied into the Hudson, I was just correcting him. That TMR is a different river.
    Gotcha

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Mystic River
    By dlnewhouse in forum Banter
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-08-2018, 07:54 PM
  2. Speeding Tickets: VC 22350 at Green River Rd, Corona
    By Fandry96 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-22-2012, 02:34 PM
  3. Deer Hunting on Dry River Bed
    By Jackn1984 in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-29-2008, 05:30 PM
  4. Minor in Possession: MIC On The River
    By sports8400 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2008, 09:13 PM
  5. Rent and Utilities: Landlord Didn't Tell Us Our Hot Water Feeds The "Community" Clothes Washer
    By bad.mongo in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-02-2007, 10:35 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources