Tift v. San Sebastian Harbor Project, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tift v. San Sebastian Harbor Project, LLC

108 So. 3d 741, 2013 WL 843069, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3738

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 8, 2013

DocketNo. 5D11-2471

StatusPublished

This text of 108 So. 3d 741 (Tift v. San Sebastian Harbor Project, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tift v. San Sebastian Harbor Project, LLC, 108 So. 3d 741, 2013 WL 843069, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3738 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

T.W. Tift, Jr., (“Mr.Tift”), timely appeals an amended final judgment which found that plaintiffs below, Mr. Tift and Sebastian Harbor Villas Condominium Owners’ Association, Inc., (“Association”), did not have a deeded easement, nor a prescriptive easement, to cross the property of San Sebastian Harbor Project, LLC, (“San Sebastian”), defendant below, for access to the traffic light at the intersection of U.S. 1 and State Road 207 in St. Augustine, Florida, and which further quieted San Sebastian’s title in its property against the claims of Plaintiffs except for rights to a granted easement to access U.S. 1 (described by the parties and the court as the “Corrected East/West Easement”) and an easement to a lift station located near the center of San Sebastian’s property (described as the “North/South Easement”). San Sebastian cross-appeals the trial court’s ruling that Plaintiffs have any right to use the North/South Easement. We affirm as to the issues raised by Mr. Tift without further comment. However, we reverse that part of the amended final judgment finding that Mr. Tift and the Association have a right, title or interest in the North/South Easement. As argued by San Sebastian, neither Mr. Tift nor the Association proved any prescriptive right to use the North/South Easement, nor was the North/South Easement within Plaintiffs’ chain of title.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

TORPY, LAWSON and BERGER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

T.W. Tift, Jr., (“Mr.Tift”), timely appeals an amended final judgment which found that plaintiffs below, Mr. Tift and Sebastian Harbor Villas Condominium Owners’ Association, Inc., (“Association”), did not have a deeded easement, nor a prescriptive easement, to cross the property of San Sebastian Harbor Project, LLC, (“San Sebastian”), defendant below, for access to the traffic light at the intersection of U.S. 1 and State Road 207 in St. Augustine, Florida, and which further quieted San Sebastian’s title in its property against the claims of Plaintiffs except for rights to a granted easement to access U.S. 1 (described by the parties and the court as the “Corrected East/West Easement”) and an easement to a lift station located near the center of San Sebastian’s property (described as the “North/South Easement”). San Sebastian cross-appeals the trial court’s ruling that Plaintiffs have any right to use the North/South Easement. We affirm as to the issues raised by Mr. Tift without further comment. However, we reverse that part of the amended final judgment finding that Mr. Tift and the Association have a right, title or interest in the North/South Easement. As argued by San Sebastian, neither Mr. Tift nor the Association proved any prescriptive right to use the North/South Easement, nor was the North/South Easement within Plaintiffs’ chain of title.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

TORPY, LAWSON and BERGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 So. 3d 741, 2013 WL 843069, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3738, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tift-v-san-sebastian-harbor-project-llc-fladistctapp-2013.