[WSBARP] "Gifted" Easement

[Roger Hawkes]

Does 'way of necessity' apply?

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of samuel at meylerlegal.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 10:06 AM
To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] "Gifted" Easement

B's current home is situated on the "pole" of the lot so the only way to build another home on the "flag" and have access is through the neighbor's property.


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<mailto: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.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> On Behalf Of Mark Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 9:47 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] "Gifted" Easement

Am I correct in assuming that the flagpole is not wide enough to serve as an access road to the back "flag" portion of B's lot?

Mark B. Anderson
ANDERSON LAW FIRM PLLC
821 Dock St  Ste 209  PMB 4-12
Tacoma, Washington 98402
+1 253-327-1750
+1 253-327-1751 (fax)
marka at mbaesq.com<mailto:marka at mbaesq.com>
www.mbaesq.com<http://www.mbaesq.com/>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This transmission is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the individual named recipient. It may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or other confidentiality protection. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender via e-mail or by telephone at (253) 327-1750 that you have received the message in error, and then delete it. Thank you.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> On Behalf Of samuel at meylerlegal.com<mailto:samuel at meylerlegal.com>
Sent: 10/25/2022 4:41 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] "Gifted" Easement

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<mailto: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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20221026/24945b93/attachment.html>