SUPERIOR COURT CASE 2007-CIV-02818
This is a dispute between neighbors regarding the location of their common boundary, the validity, location and permissible uses of the defendants express easement over a portion of the plaintiffs property, whether trespasses have occurred, [Note 1] whether a fence and tree erected by the defendant are spite fences prohibited by G.L. c. 49, § 21, whether a contempt of this courts preliminary injunction has occurred, and the appropriate remedies associated with these claims.
For the reasons set forth in the courts Decision of this date, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the parties common boundary lines are in the locations shown on plaintiffs survey (Trial Ex. 137), that the eastern edge of the defendants easement is located one foot west of, and parallel to, the plaintiffs fence along the western side of her residence, that the easements width extends to the plaintiffs western boundary line, and that the defendant may use that easement only to pass and re-pass, not to stop or park. The plaintiff and her guests may park in any area of the easement so long as they do not unreasonably interfere with the defendants right to pass and re-pass over it. This includes, but is not limited to, the plaintiffs and her guests right to park along the street so that no more than three feet of their vehicles intrude into the easement. This may continue except for those specific times (if any) that defendant has a demonstrated need for access that requires that space (e.g. an unusually large truck). The defendant must give reasonable advance notice, in writing, of such a specific need, giving time, date and explanation.
It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the defendants eight foot high fence and fifteen foot tall tree as shown on the Decision Sketch are spite fences prohibited by G.L. c. 49, § 21. The defendant must remove the tree and may not make any tree or other plantings on the south portion of lot 25 over six feet in height that in any way block the plaintiffs view of Mascuppic Lake. The fence must be lowered so that it is no more than six feet in height, measured from the ground. Both the removal of the tree and the lowering of the fence must be done within ninety days. The defendant may park her cars and other vehicles anywhere on her property not otherwise prohibited by law so long as they are not placed in such a manner and in such locations (i.e. in a line along or near the plaintiffs southern boundary line) as to make them the equivalent of a spite fence. No finding of contempt is made or necessary since the relief set forth above is a sufficient remedy for any such contempt. No damages are awarded to either party.
By the court (Long, J.)
[Note 1] Only future injunctive relief is sought.