In short: No. In Keys Island Properties, LLC v. Crow, 97 So. 3d 329 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012), the Third District held on September 19, 2012 that a 2003 quiet title judgment could not extinguish an 1895 easement that no one pleaded or asked the court to decide. A survey attached to the complaint that showed a ‘conc alleyway’ was not enough to put the easement at issue.
The Facts
Jaden Lane, LLC, the predecessor of Keys Island Properties, LLC, sued Daniel E. Crow, II and others in Monroe County to enforce an easement created in 1895 across the Crows’ property. The trial court entered final judgment for the Crows, finding the easement was extinguished by a 2003 quiet title action.
In that earlier case, Charles William Ansell, II sued to establish his ownership interests in the dominant and servient parcels, including a one-third interest in the dominant tenements and full ownership of the servient tenement. He attached a survey that showed a ‘conc alleyway,’ which the Crows said was the easement. The parties stipulated to a final judgment whose metes and bounds description did not mention any easement. The trial court in the later case reasoned that the easement was part of the complaint but not the judgment, so it was extinguished.
Keys Island appealed (No. 3D12-360), and the case was argued on August 29, 2012.
- Keys Island argued the easement appeared nowhere in the quiet title complaint, and a word on an attached survey could not make it an issue.
- The Crows argued all interested parties were in the quiet title case, the stipulated judgment redrew the boundaries without the easement, and the easement had gone unused for years. They relied on a Fifth District case holding that owners who platted their land without showing an easement were estopped to assert it against later buyers.
The Decision
The Third District reversed in an authored opinion filed September 19, 2012. No issue about the easement was properly pleaded in the quiet title action. The complaint and prayer for relief sought only to quiet title and establish ownership interests, and an easement is a right distinct from ownership of the land, not title to it.
The attached survey did not satisfy the pleading rule because it was not a short and plain statement of ultimate facts, and given the prayer for relief it did not put anyone on notice that the easement was at stake. To hold otherwise, the court said, would ‘facilitate, if not promote, the taking of property interests by ambush.’ Because a court lacks jurisdiction to decide matters not properly pleaded and noticed, the silence of the final judgment could not extinguish the easement.
The court found the platting case, Estate of Johnston v. TPE Hotels, Inc., inapplicable: a plat carries special protections for buyers who rely on it, a final judgment does not, and the servient owner’s successor here was not a bona fide purchaser without notice. The court took no position on the easement’s current nature, its dimensions, or whether it was extinguished some other way, leaving those issues for the parties to litigate.
The Law
Florida’s quiet title statute, section 65.061, lets a court determine competing claims of title to land. Keys Island holds that the judgment reaches only what the pleadings put at issue.
Rule 1.110(b) requires a pleading that seeks relief to state a cause of action and contain a short and plain statement of the ultimate facts showing the pleader is entitled to relief. The court relied on that rule and on due process: a court cannot decide matters not raised by proper pleadings and notice.
The court also noted that merger can extinguish an easement when the dominant and servient estates come into common ownership that is co-extensive and equal, but the quiet title plaintiff did not seek that kind of ownership, so merger was not in play.
Lessons
- If you want a quiet title judgment to clear an easement, plead the easement and ask for that relief expressly.
- Easement holders are not bound by a judgment in a case that never put their easement at issue.
- An exhibit, like a survey, does not substitute for allegations and a prayer for relief.
- Winning on this point does not settle everything. Abandonment, scope and location of the easement were left open for further litigation.
- Title examiners should read the pleadings behind a quiet title judgment, not just the judgment, to know what it actually decided.
Source: Keys Island Properties, LLC v. Crow, 97 So. 3d 329 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 19, 2012), No. 3D12-360 (reversed); ACIS docket, No. 3D2012-0360.
Watch the Oral Argument
This is the recording of the actual oral argument, posted on the channel. What lawyers and judges say at argument is not the ruling; the decision is summarized above.
🔏 Did a Quiet Title Judgment Wipe Out an Easement That Was Never Pleaded?
Read the Law on FloridaRules.net
The statutes and court rules discussed in this article, free to read on FloridaRules.net:
Go Deeper
- An Unrecorded Easement, a Seller Who Sat on the Buyer's Board (Lauramar v. Mel Fisher)
- A Ten-Foot Beach Access Easement Means All Ten Feet, and Horses Too (Condron v. Arey)
- A Fence Since 1976 Wins a Key West Strip by Adverse Possession (Dadd v. Houde)
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a quiet title action extinguish an easement in Florida?
Only if the easement is properly pleaded and put at issue. In Keys Island Properties v. Crow, the Third District held a quiet title judgment that never addressed an 1895 easement did not extinguish it.
Is an easement the same as owning the land?
No. An easement is a right to use someone else’s land for a purpose, not title to the land. That distinction is why a complaint about ownership did not put the Keys Island easement at issue.
Can an old easement be lost if no one uses it?
Easements can be extinguished in several ways, such as abandonment or merger, but each has its own requirements. Keys Island left open whether the 1895 easement was lost some other way, holding only that the quiet title judgment did not extinguish it.
Does attaching a survey to a complaint put everything on it at issue?
No. The Third District held that a survey showing a ‘conc alleyway’ did not satisfy rule 1.110(b)’s requirement of a short and plain statement of ultimate facts and did not give notice the easement was at stake.
Talk to a Florida real estate litigation lawyer
Weidner Law, P.A. handles Florida real estate disputes, title problems and appeals from St. Petersburg. If you need a real estate litigation lawyer, call (727) 954-8752 or email weidner@mattweidnerlaw.com.
Read the law yourself, free: every Florida statute and court rule is on floridarules.net.
This article is general information about Florida law, not legal advice about your situation. Reading it, watching the videos, or contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case turns on its own facts, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements.
