Title: Lalonde v. Renaud

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 86-533

                              APRIL TERM, 1989


Jacques and Therese Lalonde,      }          APPEALED FROM:
Raymond and Therese Fichaud,      }
Vivian and Patrick Ferris,        }
J. W. Ruddy, J. A. Lead,          }
D. Dumont and Guy Seguin          }
                                  }          Grand Isle Superior Court
     v.                           }
                                  }
                                  }
Dennis S. Renaud and              }
Isabelle L. Renaud                }          DOCKET NO. S63-10-84Gc


             In the above entitled cause the Clerk will enter:

     Defendant-appellants move for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40 from a
decision rendered by this Court on December 29, 1989.  Because defendants'
motion fails to identify points of law or fact overlooked or misapprehended,
their motion is denied.  Plaintiff-appellees' move for correction.  Their
motion is granted.  The opinion has been withdrawn and references to lot ten
have been replaced with references to the area north of lot ten.

     Motion for reargument is denied; motion for correction is granted.



                                   BY THE COURT:


                          Frederic W. Allen, Chief Justice


                                   Louis P. Peck, Associate Justice


[ ]  Publish                       Ernest W. Gibson III, Associate Justice

[ ]  Do Not Publish
                                   John A. Dooley, Associate Justice


                                   Albert W. Barney, Chief Justice (Ret.),
                                   Specially Assigned


------------------------------------------------------------------------------




NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40
as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports.
Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Vermont Supreme
Court, 111 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602 of any errors in order
that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press.



                                No. 86-533


Jacques and Therese Lalonde,                 Supreme Court
Raymond and Therese Fichaud,
Vivian and Patrick Ferris,                   On Appeal from
J. W. Ruddy, J. A. Lead,                     Grand Isle Superior Court
D. Dumont and Guy Seguin
                                             April Term, 1989
     v.

Dennis S. Renaud and
Isabelle L. Renaud



James L. Morse, J.

Michael Rose, St. Albans, for plaintiffs-appellees

David G. Miller, St. Albans, for defendants-appellants


PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Peck, Gibson and Dooley, and Barney, C.J. (Ret.),
          Specially Assigned



     PECK, J.   Defendants appeal from a trial court judgment declaring
that a lot to which defendants claimed title was park area, as designated in
the developer's subdivision plans.  We affirm.
     All parties are owners of lots in the so-called Kirk and Fitts
development, which was created in 1957 and is adjacent to Lake Champlain in
Alburg.  Plaintiffs collectively own seven lots in the subdivision, but
only plaintiffs Jacques and Therese Lalonde purchased their property from
the developers, in 1966.  All of the plaintiffs' deeds refer to a map, which
the trial court found was recorded (FN1) and which depicted an area north of lot
10 of the subdivision as a park.  The deeds, however, did not expressly
refer to a park, nor did the declaration of restrictions in any of the deeds
expressly prohibit construction in the area designated as a park.  Neverthe-
less, there was no dispute that the area was used and maintained as a park
at least since 1966, and the trial court so found.
     Ownership of area north of lot 10 designated as park remained with the
developers until they sold it by quitclaim deed, along with other land, to
defendants' predecessors in title in 1977.  Defendants purchased the area in
1982, and in 1984 erected a fence between the beach and the grassy portion
of the park.  When they made it known that they intended to develop the
area, the present action ensued.
     The trial court concluded that the original lots were sold by reference
to a recorded plat indicating a park area and that the purchasers acquired
rights in the park.  In Clearwater Realty Co. v. Bouchard, 146 Vt. 359,