Real Property Law

In an action to quiet title to real property, easement claimant appealed from Supreme Court's dismissal of the complaint. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that a termination of covenants was enforceable and easement claimant had not alleged sufficient hostility to establish title by adverse possession or an easement by prescription.

The parcel owned by the easement claimant was originally held in common ownership with a number of neighboring parcels. In 1950, the common grantor conveyed the property located to the east of claimant's parcel subject to a covenant guaranteeing mutual access to a number of parcels. The covenant, however, did not include the parcel currently owned by the easement claimant, but it did include parcels located to the east, south and west of claimant's parcel. In 1977, when the common grantor conveyed claimant's parcel to the claimant's predecessor, the deed made no mention of the covenant. Shortly thereafter, the common grantor and the owner of the parcel to the east of claimant's parcel entered into an agreement cancelling the restrictive covenant. Nevertheless, claimant has used the parcel to the west for access to its own business since at least the 1990s. Owner of that parcel installed physical barriers and a curb cut that interfered with claimant's use, resulting in this litigation. In addition to seeking enforcement of the 1950 covenant, claimant contended that it had acquired an easement by prescription or estoppels, or had established title by adverse possession. Supreme Court dismissed the complaint.