[WSBARP] "Gifted" Easement

Tue Oct 25 19:46:01 PDT 2022

Interesting question.  If a future owner of parcel A files a lawsuit for
termination of an easement based on no consideration in the initial grant -
then good luck trying to win that case.  I think that would be hard to
prove.  Consideration can be present in other forms rather than money if a
benefit/detriment can be shown....especially if the template language of
"and other good and valuable consideration" is used in the easement grant.

If someone knows a case please email it to the list.  It would be one of
only a few ways to terminate easements.

Kelby J. Derenick
Attorney

*10018 Greenwood Ave. N*
*Seattle, WA 98133*
*Ph. (206) 659-5061*

*14 E. Main Street, Suite 207*
*Walla Walla, WA 99362*
*Ph: (509) 676-9805*

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic mail message contains information
that (a) is or may be legally privileged, confidential, proprietary in
nature, or otherwise protected by law from disclosure, and (b) is intended
only for the use of the Addressee(s) named herein. If you are not the
intended recipient, an addressee, or the person responsible for delivering
this to an addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, using, copying,
or distributing any part of this message is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact me
immediately and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely
from your computer system.  Thank you.

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 6:59 PM Meyler Legal, PLLC <samuel at meylerlegal.com>
wrote:

> While non-use will not extinguish an easement, can an easement that has
> been conveyed for no consideration at all (a gift) be revoked by either the
> grantor or the grantor’s heirs?
>
>
>
> *Samuel M. Meyler*
>
> *Meyler Legal, PLLC*
>
> *1700 Westlake Ave. N., Ste. 200*
>
> *Seattle, WA 98109*
>
> *Main: 206-876-7770*
>
> *Fax: 206-876-7771*
>
> *Direct: 206-876-7772*
>
> *Email: samuel at meylerlegal.com <samuel at meylerlegal.com>*
>
>
> *NOTICE:*
>
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be Confidential or
> Privileged and constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning
> of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 USC 2510. The information
> is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If
> you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure,
> copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is
> prohibited.  If you received this transmission in error, please notify the
> sender and delete the copy you received together with any attachments.
> Thank you.
>
> On Oct 25, 2022, at 5:31 PM, Douglas Scott <doug at rainieradvocates.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
> An easement cannot be extinguished or abandoned by none use.  Thompson v
> Smith 59 Wn.2d 397 (1962)
> *DOUGLAS W. SCOTT*
> Rainier Legal Advocates|LLC
>
> 465 Rainier Blvd. N., Suite C
> Issaquah, Washington 98027
> 425.392.8550 (tel)
> 425.392.2829 (fax)
>
>
>
> www.rainieradvocates.com
>
>
> Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain
> information that is confidential and protected by the attorney/client or
> other privileges. It constitutes non-public information intended to be
> conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of
> this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of
> the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it to the intended
> recipient, or you believe that you have received this communication in
> error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly
> delete this e-mail, including attachments without reading or saving them in
> any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or
> reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may
> be unlawful. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is not
> a waiver of any attorney/client or other privilege
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 4:48 PM <samuel at meylerlegal.com> wrote:
>
>> Listmates,
>>
>>
>>
>> A and B are neighbors.  B’s property is a flag shaped lot that wraps
>> around A’s property.  B is thinking about developing the back part of their
>> property in the future and brings it up to A.  Not sure how much longer A
>> is going to be living there, A offers to give B an easement over a portion
>> of A’s property so that B has an access road to the back “flag” portion of
>> B’s lot.  B would not be making use of the easement anytime soon because
>> the plan to develop is more of a ten-year plan.
>>
>>
>>
>> From my point of view, the proposed easement would be a significant
>> burden on A’s lot and would probably diminish the value of A’s property.  A
>> doesn’t seem to care now, but maybe they change their mind when they go to
>> sell in the future (or the executor of A’s estate does?).
>>
>>
>>
>> What are the implications of “gifting” an easement in this scenario?  Can
>> an easement that has been conveyed and recorded in the county records be
>> revoked if no consideration has been given and B has not yet made any
>> significant use of the easement (no detrimental reliance)?  Any other
>> creative ideas for addressing this scenario?  Am I missing anything?
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Samuel M. Meyler*
>>
>> *Meyler Legal, PLLC *
>>
>> 1700 Westlake Ave. N., Ste. 200
>>
>> Seattle, Washington 98109
>>
>> *Tel:*  206.876.7770
>>
>> *Fax:*  206.876.7771
>>
>> *Email:*  samuel at meylerlegal.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *NOTICE:*
>>
>>
>>
>> This electronic message contains information which may be Confidential or
>> Privileged and constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning
>> of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 USC 2510. The information
>> is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If
>> you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure,
>> copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is
>> prohibited.  If you received this transmission in error, please notify the
>> sender and delete the copy you received together with any attachments.
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
>> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
>> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
>> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
>> others.***
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WSBARP mailing list
>> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
>> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>>
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20221025/ee4c7c53/attachment.html>