MISC 316972

October 14, 2008


Piper, J.


Plaintiff Constance Moore (“plaintiff”) filed the verified complaint in this action on December 21, 2005. Plaintiff owns, and resides in a house on, a parcel known as 17 Thornton Park, Winthrop, Massachusetts. Defendants William and Beverly Greeley (“defendants”) own, and reside in a house on, a parcel known as 15 Thornton Park in Winthrop. Defendants’ property fronts on Thornton Park, a public street, and plaintiff’s property is located immediately behind defendants’ property. Plaintiff does not have direct access to Thornton Park without passing over defendants’ property or some other party’s land.

By deed dated June 21, 2000, and recorded at the Suffolk Registry of Deeds in Book 25064 at Page 231, plaintiff acquired her property by deed of her mother, Ruth R. Moore. In the deed plaintiff’s land is said to have the benefit of a record easement right granting “a perpetual right of way on, over or in a strip of land nine (9) feet wide extending from Thornton Park to the granted premises....” The deed into plaintiff identifies the easement as that described in a 1947 deed, from one Payne to grantees named Skillings, recorded in the Suffolk Registry in Book 6323, Page 483, and describes the location of the easement to be as shown on a 1950 recorded plan, recorded in Book 6649, at Page 196. The right of way (“disputed right of way”) runs over defendants’ land, along the northern boundary of defendants’ property (and adjacent to defendants’ house) from Thornton Park in the front, to the property of plaintiff in the rear. At issue in this case is the scope of the right of way.

This matter came on to be tried to the court (Piper, J.) which, in a decision of even date, [Note 1] has made findings of fact and rulings of law. In accordance with the court’s decision, it is

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECLARED that the disputed right of way burdening the Greeley Property and benefitting the Moore Property is to be used only for pedestrian passage between the Moore Property and Thornton Park, and that plaintiff as owner of the Moore Property does not have any right or easement to drive with vehicles, or to park them, in, on or over the Greeley Property. It is further

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the defendants, their tenants, invitees, agents, employees, and all others residing at or occupying the Greeley Property, or otherwise having actual knowledge of this Judgment, are permanently enjoined and restrained from using the right of way in such a manner as would inhibit the plaintiff’s use of the right of way for free pedestrian passage between the Moore Property and Thornton Park. In all other respects, the defendants may use the right of way in a reasonable manner that is not inconsistent with the plaintiff’s use of the right of way for pedestrian passage. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing sentence, defendants may use the right of way to park up to two vehicles, aligned front to back, in the area of the right of way closest to their dwelling house. It is further

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that no fees, costs, damages, or other amounts are awarded to any party.

By the Court. (Piper, J.)


[Note 1] Terms used but undefined in this Judgment have the meanings assigned to them in the court’s decision of even date.