Background:

• In 1850, Sylvester Hewes conveyed a strip of land to Maine Central Railroad Co.’s predecessor, which bisected his property. The deed did not reserve any right to cross the track.
• Subsequent owners, the Pendletons (for 57 years) and later Connolly and McCatherin, regularly crossed the track to access the southern portion of the property without denial from Maine Central.
• Connolly and McCatherin sought a declaratory judgment that they possessed a “permanent free, open and unobstructed perpetual right-of-way” over Maine Central property.
• The Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of Connolly and McCatherin, ruling they had an implied quasi-easement.

Maine Central’s Appeal and Discussion:

• Maine Central appealed, arguing Connolly and McCatherin failed to establish all elements of an implied quasi-easement.
• A quasi-easement requires: (1) open use of the property as a “quasi-easement” under single ownership, (2) the common grantor’s intent for the quasi-easement to continue as a true easement, and (3) continued use by owners of the retained property.
• The key issue on appeal was the second element: Sylvester Hewes’s intent.
• The court found that the summary judgment record lacked undisputed facts to conclusively establish Hewes’s intent to retain an easement.
• The Superior Court had relied heavily on a similar case, Robinson v. Maine Central Railroad Co., but the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine distinguished the cases, stating that Hewes’s intent in this case could not be inferred from the facts of the Robinson case due to differences in the summary judgment evidence.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine vacated the summary judgment and remanded the case for a trial. The court concluded that there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding Sylvester Hewes’s intent, which is a necessary element for establishing an implied quasi-easement.

Summary by Gemini