Plaintiff, James E. Luippold, commenced this case on June 15, 2009, seeking a Declaratory Judgment that he, as owner of Lot B as shown on a plan recorded at the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 209, Page 78, has an easement for ingress and egress over a portion of Defendants Lot A as shown on the same plan (Count I), and seeking also treble damages for Defendants alleged trespass, pursuant to G. L. c. 242, § 7 (Count II). The case came on to be heard on Defendants motion for partial summary judgment, filed with a supporting memorandum on March 19, 2010, seeking judgment that Plaintiff does not have such an easement. Plaintiff filed an opposition to Defendants motion on April 20, 2010, and the Court heard arguments from counsel and took the matter under advisement on April 23, 2010.
After careful consideration of all of the evidence, the Court issued an Order today, denying Defendants Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and granting Partial Summary Judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, finding that the Plaintiff does, by virtue of his ownership of Lot B, have easement rights over Defendants parcel. In the Order, the Court dismissed Count II of Plaintiffs complaint without prejudice, ruling that the Land Court lacks jurisdiction over trespass claims not arising from a title dispute. In accordance with that Order, it is hereby:
ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the Plaintiff has an appurtenant easement for ingress and egress to his land, on North street, over a portion of Lot A approximately fifty (50) feet wide and extending approximately two hundred (200) feet northerly from North Street. It is further
ADJUDGED and ORDERED that Count II, Plaintiffs trespass claim, is dismissed without prejudice.
By the Court. (Trombly, J).
[Note 1] Unless otherwise indicated, all terms used herein carry the same definition as employed in the Order.