Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 60
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,734

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

    Quote Quoting budwad
    View Post
    Once again your self-important bloviating on the law provides no proofs in case law or statute that backs up your position.

    And the case citations are contained in the quotes and if you took the time to look up the cases and read them you may have been educated.
    and of course budwad is back to trolling.

    most of the case citations aren’t even from New York so they don’t have any weight. I guess if you want to post irrelevent citations, well, I shouldn’t expect anything more.



    A couple others I looked at and they didn’t address the issue st hand.

    The case citation I was speaking of is the case those groups of citations came from. Those citations you posted are reference for that case. Unless the case those citations were reference for dealt with the issue at hand, your not likely going to find the referenced citations useful.

    If you have something actually on point, then post it. Throwing up meaningless cases is useless.


    I have no no need to post citations. It won’t make any difference. I pointed the op a way to look towards. It’s up to him from that point. The attorney the op hires is surely more familiar with New York case law than I am.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,465

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

    Whenever you are challenged on the law you resort to Budwad is trolling. Just pathetic. You are loosing your credibility even though you don't see it.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,734

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

    Quote Quoting budwad
    View Post
    Whenever you are challenged on the law you resort to Budwad is trolling. Just pathetic. You are loosing your credibility even though you don't see it.
    go away troll. Your posting to me is nothing but trolling. If you want to post some pertinent case law, have at it. If you don’t want to, go troll a bridge somewhere. You’re doing nothing but mucking up somebody else’s thread.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    15

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

    I've been to the county map and deeds room and learned quite a bit.

    The "beach and recreation" area referred to in the easement appear on a map called Lakeridge Estates filed with the county in 1980. The coordinates for those 2 areas are the lawful access points for lot owners. I doubt the lakebed owner has much shoreline there but I'll confirm it.

    At any rate it clears up a misconception around here that the entire 23 acre western shoreline of the former lake was an access point. That large plot has always been regarded as community land and in fact another county map from 1925 called Map of Tusten Park section C shows the western shore as "RESERVED FOR LOT OWNERS". I've found deeds going back to 1951 that grant the buyer permission to use that reserved shoreline for "fishing, aquatic activities, croquet, tennis, promenading" and of all things hunting. I don't know how promenading and hunting go together but whatever.

    So it appears there were 2 developments, the eastern being Lakeridge Estates and the western being Tusten Park. The maps indicate that the beach area is more or less contiguous with the 23 acre communal western shoreline.

    That 23 acre parcel is now being subdivided and sold to people who are convinced there are no covenants or easements on it. That may change if I can show that the "reserved" status was somehow a legal convenant. I don't know if those statements of privilege on old deeds constitutes a covenant or granting.
    So the water access point seems to be clearer and I am pursuing the western shoreline topic.

    The DEC has informed me the Ten Mile River is protected under Article 15 of NYS water law. They didn't give me the river's classification so I will be seeking that out. It empties into the Delaware which puts it under jurisdiction of the Delaware River Basin Commision. Another division has contacted me regarding water withdrawal as the lakebed owner may be pumping from the river to keep her pond full. That is not entirely illegal but there are limits to the gallons you can take.

    I'm reading up the thread tonight, I greatly appreciate all inputs. I wanted to post this new info as incomplete as it is.

    Lastly for the moment there is curious wording in those old deeds stating the buyer may use the lake as it is today or in whatever future form it takes. That's a paraphrase. Interesting that they would anticipate the lake changing. If it interests anyone the entire enterprise springs from The Tusten Development Corporation which was on 42nd St. in Manhattan. It was probably a 5x8 room with a rented telephone.

    Is there a way to upload images that do not come from a URL? I'd like to show the maps.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,734

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

    The only way, I know of, to afford access to images is to host them on a image sharing site and provide a link.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,465

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

    Quote Quoting arcticranger
    View Post
    I've been to the county map and deeds room and learned quite a bit.

    The "beach and recreation" area referred to in the easement appear on a map called Lakeridge Estates filed with the county in 1980. The coordinates for those 2 areas are the lawful access points for lot owners. I doubt the lakebed owner has much shoreline there but I'll confirm it.

    At any rate it clears up a misconception around here that the entire 23 acre western shoreline of the former lake was an access point. That large plot has always been regarded as community land and in fact another county map from 1925 called Map of Tusten Park section C shows the western shore as "RESERVED FOR LOT OWNERS". I've found deeds going back to 1951 that grant the buyer permission to use that reserved shoreline for "fishing, aquatic activities, croquet, tennis, promenading" and of all things hunting. I don't know how promenading and hunting go together but whatever.

    So it appears there were 2 developments, the eastern being Lakeridge Estates and the western being Tusten Park. The maps indicate that the beach area is more or less contiguous with the 23 acre communal western shoreline.

    That 23 acre parcel is now being subdivided and sold to people who are convinced there are no covenants or easements on it. That may change if I can show that the "reserved" status was somehow a legal convenant. I don't know if those statements of privilege on old deeds constitutes a covenant or granting.
    So the water access point seems to be clearer and I am pursuing the western shoreline topic..
    It's good to hear that you are making progress. And I think your case is getting stronger.

    Those deeds that you found that say the large plot of land was reserved for lot owners to access the lake is a binding covenant and grants easement right that run with the land IMO. They can't be obfuscated by omission in subsequent deeds unless there is express language by the grantee giving up those rights.

    You should read this NY case. While not exactly on point with your situation (I have found non that is closer to your case) it will give you some insight.

    Quote Quoting arcticranger
    View Post
    Lastly for the moment there is curious wording in those old deeds stating the buyer may use the lake as it is today or in whatever future form it takes. That's a paraphrase. Interesting that they would anticipate the lake changing. If it interests anyone the entire enterprise springs from The Tusten Development Corporation which was on 42nd St. in Manhattan. It was probably a 5x8 room with a rented telephone.
    That is interesting but what does the location of the development corp. have to do with anything. 42nd Street in Manhattan was and still is a high rent district.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,734

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

    I’ve found a very interesting article regarding navigability of a waterway in New York.

    https://prfamerica.org/speeches/11th...ntroversy.html

    an excerpt from that article. It does speak of activity in the state legislature regarding the matter. I have not searched for that.

    We got a decision from the Court of Appeals, and it is an interesting dichotomy here. The decision said that we are adhering to the traditional commercial utility test in New York State. We are not going to deviate from that because it would have such an unsettling effect on real property rights. But what we do think is that times have changed, and we have to recognize that water bodies are no longer necessary avenues for transport for goods to market. So in making the determination on a case by case basis of whether a water body is navigable under a commercial test, we are going to take into account recreational use because recreation is big business in New York, so it has commercial utility. Okay, so that is one of the factors to be taken into account.
    The Court of Appeals sent the case back for a determination, a trial as to whether this particular river met that particular standard. We then settled the case by allowing very limited access when water levels reached a certain amount. There were temporal levels on when people could pass through. There were severe limitations on incidental use.

    I’ve found nothing in budwads link applicable to your situation. It appears to be nothing more than an argument between dominant and servient tenants of an easement. It does nothing to address “new” land created by avulsion.


  8. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,465

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

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    [SIZE=3]I’ve found nothing in budwads link applicable to your situation. It appears to be nothing more than an argument between dominant and servient tenants of an easement. It does nothing to address “new” land created by avulsion.
    Well then you are ignorant or didn't read it. It deals with a reserve easement for access to the beach over the lands of another.

    You keep loosing your credibility with just about every post you make now.

    Since I didn't address anything you posted and I was speaking to the OP, you are the obvious troll.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,734

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

    Quote Quoting budwad
    View Post
    Well then you are ignorant or didn't read it. It deals with a reserve easement for access to the beach over the lands of another.

    You keep loosing your credibility with just about every post you make now.

    Since I didn't address anything you posted and I was speaking to the OP, you are the obvious troll.
    But it addresses nothing regarding a loss of rights due to a loss of waterfront due to avulsion. That is what is important here. They have the rights to frequent the land designated as their easement (no direct riparian rights, only rights granted by their easement). I’ve never argued that and your link doesn’t even address that.

    And I addressed the op. You are the first, between us, to address the other. Bugger off old creepy dude.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    15

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

    It's funny that's all. 42nd st. was not high rent back in the day it was crime and scam central. Hookers, pimps, drug dealers, con artists. When you read some of the old deeds describing croquet fields, horseback riding and tennis you realize this development was a bit of a scam aimed at low income New Yorkers.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Mystic River
    By dlnewhouse in forum Banter
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-08-2018, 08:54 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, 03:34 PM
  3. Deer Hunting on Dry River Bed
    By Jackn1984 in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-29-2008, 06:30 PM
  4. Minor in Possession: MIC On The River
    By sports8400 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2008, 10:13 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, 11:35 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources