McCormick v. Long

226 A.D.2d 1067, 641 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5526
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 19, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: We affirm that portion of the judgment that decrees that plaintiffs are the owners of the beach area lying between the high bank on their property and the waters of Lake Erie. We modify the judgment, however, by vacating the second, third and fourth decretal paragraphs and by denying the motion and cross motion for summary judgment insofar as they seek a declaration of the easement rights of defendants over the beach area. Factual issues exist regarding the nature and scope of the easements granted in common to all owners of the subdivision. (Appeals from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McCormick v. Long, 226 A.D.2d 1067, 641 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5526 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

226 A.D.2d 1067 (McCormick v. Long) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hopper v. Friery
260 A.D.2d 964 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)