Michael R. McElroy v. Marilyn O. Stephens

Syllabus

After a bench trial, a justice of the Superior Court determined that Michael R. and Christine O. McElroy (plaintiffs) maintained an express and an implied easement to access Seaweed Beach in Narragansett, Rhode Island. Marilyn O. Stephens, Paul G. and Nancy L. Anthony (collectively, defendants), as well as Vivian H. Lacroix, own three adjoining lots that abut Seaweed Beach. The defendants contend that the trial justice erred by (1) finding that an express easement existed over their properties, (2) concluding that an implied easement existed over their properties, (3) admitting into evidence the 1986 purchase and sales agreement, and (4) denying the motion to amend the judgment. The Supreme Court concluded that the trial justice did not err when she determined that the plaintiffs maintain an express easement appurtenant (the 1929 easement) and an implied easement allowing them to access Seaweed Beach. The Supreme Court determined that, when the plaintiffs purchased their property in 1986, the warranty deed incorporated the 1929 express easement appurtenant upon Seaweed Beach, as well as a 1960 warranty deed providing that the conveyance was \[s]ubject to restrictions of record.\ The Supreme Court explained that the inclusion of these restrictions in the plaintiffs' 1986 warranty deed would be superfluous if the plaintiffs did not possess an implied easement to reach Seaweed Beach. The Supreme Court also rejected the defendants' remaining arguments that the trial justice erred by admitting the 1986 purchase and sales agreement into evidence in alleged violation of the parol evidence rule and that the trial justice erred when she denied the motion to amend the judgment. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court's judgment.