The Court upheld the presumption established in prior cases that only fee simple ownership of an intervening strip or an express reservation in an applicable recorded instrument can sever riparian rights of a front-lot owner. In 2000 Baum, although the statutory “base fee” dedication of the strip of land “to the use of the public” was deemed vested in fee for public use pursuant to the Plat Act, the Court determined that the conveyance did not divest riparian rights, rejecting the road commission’s claim to fee title and the back-lot owners’ access and usage claims.
Read the full article [here]| State Bar of Michigan
NewsletterSignup for the free Sikora Law newsletter to keep up with the latest news and events about property law!
- Our 150th Post: Ohio Supreme Court Holds Appeal of Planning Commission Order by Service of Summons by Clerk of the Courts on Administrative Agency Along with Notice of Appeal within Statutory Timeframe is Sufficient
- Federal Reserve chief has one recipe for housing market
- Distressed Property Sales Drop, Despite Push to Sell
- American home equity cut by one-third
- More lawmakers join major push to reduce QRM down payment