View Single Post
Old 01-27-2018, 12:29 AM   #102
I bear therefore I am
timberghost's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 269
Navigability aside, I found quite interesting that (according to published reports) The Nature Conservancy added a note to the deed with intent of public passage...

“subject also to the right of the public to navigate the surface waters of Lilypad Pond, Mud Pond, the outlet leading from Mud Pond to its confluence with Shingle Shanty Stream, and Shingle Shanty Stream northeasterly from its confluence with the Mud Pond outlet to the property line between the lands herein conveyed and lands owned by the State of New York.”

Is there a full text of the Appellate Division decision that had that rejection reason (foot note):
“as no private ownership interests affecting such rights had been acquired or could be conveyed.”

When TNC held the deed, did they not have recreational rights? is that the legal reasoning here?
Feverishly avoiding "a steady stream of humanity, with a view that offers little more than butts, boots, elbows and backsides". (description quote from Joe Hackett)
timberghost is offline   Reply With Quote