DIANE BRADLEY and JOHN BRADLEY v. STONECROFT PROPERTIES, INC. and FREDERICK TONSBERG

On April 11, 2008, plaintiffs Diane and John Bradley deeded the vacant registered parcel at 149 Grove Street in Westwood (Lot 39 on Land Court Plan 17929 P) to defendant Stonecroft Properties, Inc. free and clear of any easements, encumbrances or encroachments. [Note 1] Deed (Jan. 24, 2008) (Trial Ex. 26); Transfer Certificate of Title (Apr. 11, 2008) (Trial Ex. 16). Contrary to the plaintiffs’ representations in the Purchase and Sale Agreement, there was an encroachment on Lot 39. The plaintiffs own the abutting property at 148 Grove Street (Lot 38, which also is registered land) and the underground sewer line from their residence on Lot 38 to the town’s sewer line in Grove Street cuts across the front of Lot 39. See Decision Sketch (attached to the Decision of this date). Prior to closing, the defendants discovered the encroachment and the parties agreed that they would “work[] together to have a sewer line access easement finalized and recorded in the chain of title . . . after the closing.” E-mail from Roberto DiMarco to Steven Ross and Mark Savage (Apr. 7, 2008) (Trial Ex. 5). However, no such easement has been granted and the defendants served the plaintiffs with a notice of trespass. In response to that notice, the plaintiffs filed this action, seeking to amend the Certificates of Title for both properties to note an easement for the sewer pipe on Lot 39 for the benefit of Lot 38. They also seek a permanent injunction prohibiting the defendants from interfering with their sewer line.

For the reasons set forth in the court’s Decision of this date, I find and rule that the plaintiffs do not have an easement by implication, by necessity, or by agreement. I also find and rule that defendant Stonecroft Properties, Inc. acquired title to Lot 39 from the plaintiffs free and clear of any such claims. The plaintiffs’ requests for reformation of the certificates of title and for a permanent injunction prohibiting interference with the sewer line are DENIED. Since the plaintiffs’ claims are hereby DISMISSED, in their entirety, the Memorandum of Lis Pendens is hereby DISSOLVED.

SO ORDERED.

By the court (Long, J.)