Both plaintiffs own parcels of land in Patchogue, NY. The plaintiffs sought a declaration that they should have an easement over the defendant’s parcel of land to access the beach. The plaintiff referenced a prior deed which incorporated both parcels of land, which explicitly mentioned allowing the owner of the plaintiff’s land to cross the defendant’s land for “beach and bathing purposes.” The defendant did not wish to allow the plaintiff to cross the property, in spite of the language recorded in the prior deed. They were also unable to provide a legal reason why the easement should not be enforced. Due to the defendant’s failure to raise an issue of triable fact, the plaintiff was granted summary judgment in the case:
https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2022/2022_00451.htm
