Supreme Court

22-0733 - River Plantation v. River Plantation

River Plantation Cmty. Improvement Ass’n v. River Plantation Props. LLC

Case number: 22-0733
Legal category: Real Property
Subtype: Implied Reciprocal Negative Easements
Set for oral argument: March 20, 2024

Case Summary

The issue in this case is whether real property in a residential subdivision is burdened by an implied reciprocal negative easement requiring it to be maintained as a golf course.

River Plantation is a subdivision that contains hundreds of homes and a golf course. The subdivision’s deed restrictions provide that certain “golf course lots” are burdened by restrictions that require structures to be set back from the golf course, prevent garages from facing the golf course, and mandate that telephone lines be buried. The developer included graphic depictions of the golf course in some of the plat maps that it filed for the subdivision, and the subdivision was often marketed as a golf course community. When the developer subsequently sold the golf course, the deed included an express restriction that the property must be operated as a golf course for ten years. Forty years later, the subsequent owner of the golf course, River Plantation Properties, sought to sell the golf course to a new owner who intended to stop maintaining the property as a golf course.

The subdivision’s HOA sued River Plantation Properties to establish the existence of an implied restrictive negative easement on the golf course, requiring that it be used as a golf course. While the case was pending, River Plantation Properties sold a portion of the golf course to Preisler Golf Properties LLC, and the HOA added Preisler as a defendant. Ultimately, River Plantation Properties and Preisler filed motions for traditional summary judgment, contending that any restriction on the property had expired, that the HOA failed to raise a fact issue as to the existence of a common scheme, and that River Plantation Properties had no notice of any common scheme. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of River Plantation Properties and Preisler, and the court of appeals affirmed.

The HOA petitioned for review, arguing it had at least raised a fact issue as to the existence of a common scheme sufficient to support the claimed easement of which all parties had notice. The Supreme Court granted the petition.

Case summaries are created by the Court's staff attorneys and law clerks and do not constitute the Court’s official descriptions or statements. Readers are encouraged to review the Court’s official opinions for specifics regarding each case. Links to the full case documents are included above.