sign in sign up
<<
Home , Chrysler House, Easement, Warranty deed

| 1

Easements, Access and Riparian Rights A Guide to the Governing Access to ’s Lakes, Streams and Waterways

Daniel P. Dalton, Larry Opalewski, Alex Reuter and Adel Nucho | 2 Do you own or plan to purchase on or near a Michigan lake or other waterbody?

Are you concerned about others using your property to access the water without your permission? Understanding the laws governing , riparian rights and access to waterways, and how those laws relate to your property, is crucial to ensuring your ability to enjoy it.

So what do you need to know? | 3

ith more than 11,000 inland lakes in the state of Michigan, many property disputes arise concerning W the rights and interests of those owning land on and around them1. Most disputes that make it to court involve lakefront property owners seeking to prevent backlot owners from accessing or using the lake in a certain manner.

This paper will give you a better understanding of your property rights—whether you own or plan to purchase property on or near a waterbody. Specifically, you will learn the significance of own- ing land that touches a waterbody, as opposed to being near the same. Additionally, it will explain how you can legally access a waterbody using another person’s .

The Michigan-based and attorneys of Dalton & Tomich, PLC have helped clients defend their rights to use and access lakes and other waterbodies across the state of Michigan. If you own property on or near a Michigan lake, or you plan to purchase such property soon, please contact us. We’ll help you understand and defend your rights as they relate to some of our state’s most beautiful natural resources.

Dalton & Tomich, PLC Attorneys at Daniel P. Dalton Lawrence Opalewski [email protected] [email protected] The House 719 , Suite 270 , Michigan 48226

313.859.6000 Alex Reuter Adel Nucho daltontomich.com [email protected] [email protected] | 4 Table of Contents

5 The Basics of • The Type of Interest You Hold and the Power to an

• Other Restrictions on the Use of Property

7 Water Rights • From the Bottom to the Top: Who Owns the Land Under Water? • What are Your Rights as a Riparian Land Owner? • What Determines Whether You are Using the Water Reasonably?

• What are Your Rights as a Nonriparian Land Owner?

10 Ways to Access a Waterbody • The Various Navigability Tests • Public Streets that Terminate at the Edge of Navigable Waters • Gaining Access to Water Using an Easement - The Creation of an Easement by Express Grant - The Creation of an Easement by Reservation

- The Creation of an Easement by Prescription

14 Conclusion / About the Authors | 5

The Basics Of Property Law

Before we explain your property rights and the ways an easement is created to access a waterbody, the following background information is helpful. The general concept of having interest in “property” includes various rights; these rights are often called a “bundle of sticks.” What sticks you hold depends on the interest you have in a property.2

The Type of Interest You Hold and the Power

to Grant an Easement What is an Easement? An easement is If you hold to property in “ absolute,” you essentially hold essentially the legal right to use another’s the entire bundle of sticks. This bundle includes: property in some way. • the right to exclusive Learn more about easement creation, • the right to the personal use and enjoyment of the property limitations and enforce- • the right to manage the property’s use by others, and ment in our video.

• the right to income derived from the property3 Watch now. | 6 This also includes the owner’s right to sell, lease, or use the property in any lawful way.4 Additionally, holding title in fee simple absolute generally includes of oil, gas, and minerals in the soil.5 The Statute of Generally, the language of the instrument used to create an interest in Frauds, originally property is binding. And usually, the instrument used is known as a . enacted in England While there are various types of , the most common type is a warranty in 1677, became deed. In Michigan, for example, if the deed simply states that the seller and is still a fun- damental part of “conveys and warrants” to the buyer the described property, as well as American law. As the provides the amount of consideration, it is deemed and held to be a con- name suggests, its veyance in fee simple absolute to the buyer6– i.e. conveying everything purpose is to prevent that the seller owns. fraud and perjury. In a nutshell, any that creates In addition to the landowner’s right to use and enjoy his or her property, or affects inter- it is well established that landowners have the right to allow others to est in land is void unless it is in writing use their property in exchange for some form of consideration—usually and signed by the 7 money. For example, a landowner may execute a lease giving another party to be bound. individual the right to move in and occupy the premises. Such an inter- See MCL 566.108 est in land is “possessory” in nature. (Michigan’s Statute of Frauds).

On the other hand, there are interests in land that are “nonpossessory” in nature. For instance, an easement is classified as a nonpossessory right to enter and use land in the possession another8. Among the various types of easements, like and sewer easements, a is the most relevant to this paper. Your Interest It is important to remember that only a landowner has the right to burden a Imagine you buy 9 piece of property by granting an easement. It is therefore always advisable a house and three to run a in order to determine who the true owner of a parcel is, years later someone and what are his or her respective rights relative to a piece of property. knocks on your door claiming to be the true owner of that house. Holding title Other Restrictions on the Use of Property to land could mean nothing in certain jurisdictions if the While we like to think that we can use our property in any way we please, document (usually unfortunately, this is not always true. Again, whether the use of property is a ) is 10 not recorded in the restricted depends on the language and provisions in the conveyance. For register of deeds. example, for those living in a or a platted subdivision, the use Generally speaking, of property is likely restricted in many ways. it is imperative to properly record the warranty deed you A plat map or chart of a subdivision almost always contains easement physically receive descriptions, some of which could concern the right to access and use an from the seller in inland lake. Such easements cannot be easily revoked and are deemed to order to protect bind the landowner and his or her successors.11 Always keep in mind yourself from sub- sequent purchasers that by purchasing property that references a recorded plat you are pre- or others claiming sumed to accept the benefits and any liabilities associated with it.12 superior title. | 7

Water Rights

e begin with first principles. Laws regarding the allocation of water in the are not uniform. Broadly speaking, there are two water allocation doctrines used. W Most western states follow what is known as the prior appropriation doctrine. In a nutshell, this doctrine gives property rights to whoever puts water to beneficial use first. In contrast, most eastern states follow the riparian doctrine, influenced by English law, which allows you to use a waterbody based on the location of the land. The focus of this paper is on the latter.

To better understand your right to use a lake, river, pond, stream, or any other waterbody, it is important to know what “riparian” land means. Strictly speaking, a “riparian” land is one that includes or touches a river or any natural watercourse. However, courts tend to use that term to also describe land that includes or touches a lake or sea.13 Therefore, if the land What are you own or wish to buy includes or touches a waterbody, it is considered a Riparian Rights? Riparian rights “riparian land.” Conversely, if the land you own or wish to own does not govern a property include or touch any waterbody, it is deemed and will be referred to in owners’ access this paper as “nonriparian land.” to and reasonable use of Michigan In Michigan, there are two classes of natural waters: Great Lakes and in- water bodies. Learn more in land waters. Ownership rights as to inland waters are subject to the same our video. rules of law—regardless of their size and whether they were rivers, lakes, or ponds.14 Watch now. From the Bottom to the Top: | 8

Who Owns the Land Under Water? Sample Case: Neighbor Access In many eastern states, including Michigan, if the land touches an inland Dispute Four lakefront lake, the owner of such land takes title to the center of the lake or stream property owners 15 bed. In other words, the landowner is deemed to own the bottomland share a lake access under water to the center of that waterbody. Nevertheless, as discussed easement. Owner A below, such ownership may be subject to the public’s right to use the blocks one side of surface of the water. the access points by storing his boat on it. Owners B, C and In contrast, the State of Michigan holds title to the beds of the Great D file court action Lakes.16 However, it has been long recognized in America that large to enjoin Owner A’s bodies of “navigable” water are natural resources that belong to the pub- actions that blocked lic.17 Furthermore, it is said that the State holds such title as the trustee other property owners from using of public rights in the Great Lakes for fishing, , and boating for the whole easement 18 commerce or pleasure. This is commonly known as the public trust area, thus restoring doctrine. access to all.

The Supreme Court of Michigan decided a case where property own- ers on the shore of Lake Huron —who held title to the water’s edge— sought to prevent members of the public from walking along the shore in front their property. The property owners argued that such conduct The Western States constitutes a . The court disagreed and stated that “walking The prior appro- priation doctrine along the lakeshore is inherent in the exercise of traditionally protected follows the “first in public rights.” It concluded that “our permits pedes- time, first in right” trian use of our Great Lakes, up to and including the land below the principle. The State ordinary high water mark.”19 of Colorado’s consti- tution, for example, explicitly recognizes What Are Your Rights and protects the “right to divert the as a Riparian Landowner? unappropriated wa- ters of any natural Even though a riparian landowner does not “own the water,?”21 he or stream to beneficial 37 she has the absolute right to access the water—by boat or on foot—from uses.” That right 22 is separate and anywhere their property touches the lake waters. Such landowners have apart from the land the right to make reasonable use of the entire surface and sub-surface of for which the water the lake. In addition to using the surface of the water for activities such was appropriated as boating, swimming, and fishing, riparian landowners enjoy certain or on which it has 38 exclusive rights like: been used.

1 The right to erect and maintain docks along the owner’s shore. High-Water Marks The high-water 2 The right to anchor boats permanently off the mark is a distinct owner’s shore.23 mark that the water leaves either by erosion, destruc- As stated above, the land must actually touch the water to be considered tion of terrestrial a riparian land. However, if the only land separating the property from vegetation, or other easily recognized characteristic. the water’s edge is a roadway, then the land across the road from the | 9 water generally enjoys the same riparian rights as it would if the land was touching the water. This rule applies to public highways and roads.

So, what if more than one parcel of land abuts the same waterbody? Fishing, Swimming Where there are several riparian landowners on an inland lake, they may and Docking Rights use the surface of the whole lake for boating, swimming, fishing, and What rights do other similar riparian rights, as long as they do not interfere with the rea- property owners sonable use of the waters by other riparian owners. near Michigan’s 11,000 lakes have to use those bodies What Determines Whether You are of water? Learn more in our video. Using the Water Reasonably? Watch now. The “reasonable use” of water depends on the facts of each case. Reasonable- ness is evaluated based on the following three-pronged test that courts apply:

First, the court will give attention to the size, charac - ter and natural state of the waterbody.

Second, it will consider the type and purpose of the uses proposed and their effect on the water course.

Finally, the benefit of the proposed use is balanced with the injury to other riparian owners. 24

What Are Your Rights as a Nonriparian Landowner?

As stated earlier, only riparian owners, and owners of land separated from How to Bring (and Win) a Trespass- the water’s edge only by a public road, enjoy riparian rights. Nevertheless, ing Legal Action a member of the public or a nonriparian landowner who “gains access” to What constitutes navigable water has the right to use the surface of the water in a reasonable trespassing in manner for activities like: Michigan? How can you stop it and what can you 1 Swimming do to increase 2 Boating your chances of winning the case? 3 Fishing Watch now. 4 Anchoring a boat temporarily25

With that being said, you may be wondering what is a “navigable” waterbody and how you can, as a member of the public, “gain access” to such waterbody. | 10

Ways To Access A Waterbody

There are several ways to access a lake, one of which is to use another waterbody like a creek or river that connects to such lake. However, the court will use the appropriate navigability test to determine whether both the creek or river and the lake are navigable waters. Another way is to use a public road that terminates at the edge of navigable waters. Finally, one may access the water using someone else’s land.

The Various Navigability Tests

Determining whether a waterbody is navigable is critical. Courts are split when it comes to the test used to determine whether a waterbody is considered navigable. One approach—known as the federal test—consid- ers a waterbody navigable if it was used, or capable of being used, in its natural condition, as a highways for trade when it forms by itself or by uniting with other waters a continued highway over which commerce is or may be carried on with other States or foreign countries.

Another approach—known as the federal test of navigable capac- ity—allows a court to find a waterbody navigable if it was capable of being made navigable after reasonable improvements regardless of its Dead-End Lakes Keep in mind that in natural state. In Michigan, courts use yet another test known as the “log- Michigan, it is well floating test” of determining navigability. Here, the question is whether settled that a “dead- the waterbody is capable of being used, in its natural state, for purposes end lake” with only of commerce for the floating of vessels, boats, rafts, or logs. one inlet or outlet is not navigable and, therefore, it is con- The Supreme Court of Michigan reaffirmed this test in a case where sidered a private lake riparian landowners sought to prevent other nonriparian landowners from not subject to the accessing the lake. There, several defendants were accessing a lake using public’s right to use a 240 feet long creek that varies in width from 100 to 15 feet. The Court navigable waters. emphasized that the creeks connecting the smaller with the larger lakes | 11 are too shallow to permit the flotation of logs.26 Thus, because the creeks were not “navigable under the law,” the Court held that only the riparian owners have the right to use the lakes. Michigan’s Public Road Ends at Lake Law Public Streets that Terminate at the Edge of Countless Michigan roads end at a lake. Navigable Waters What rights do you have to use that area If you live in a neighborhood where there is a public street or alley that to access the water? provides access to navigable waters, it is likely that you have the right to Read more. use the surface of the water in a reasonable manner for such activities as boating, fishing, and swimming. However, activities like lounging, sun- bathing, picnicking, and the erection of boat hoists or docks are usually prohibited. Besides such rights, however, riparian owners have complete control of the use of land covered with water. Gaining Access to Water Using an Easement

Do you own property close to but not directly on a private lake? Would you like to gain access to that lake? To better illustrate, imagine you live in the property marked below with an “X,” and would like to gain access to the lake using your neighbor’s land, marked below with an “N.” Is it possible to do so without being a trespasser? Of course: simply ask for your neighbor’s permission; however, an oral permission to do so is (1) revocable, and (2) does not run with the land. In other words, the neigh- bor may at any time take back his or her consent and prevent you from accessing the water, and no one else may use your neighbor’s land except individuals who got the neighbor’s permission. If the resident of property X wishes to access the water via his neighbor’s So, is there a better way to do so? property (N), he or she should consider getting an easement. Yes, get an easement!

While full riparian rights and ownership may not be severed from ripar- Sample Case: ian land and transferred to nonriparian backlot owners, some states allow Back-Lot Access riparian landowners to grant an easement to backlot owners to enjoy certain A lakefront property rights that are traditionally regarded as exclusively riparian.27 An easement owner has two parcels: is the right to use the land of another for a specified purpose. There are two one lakefront parcel types of easements that you must be aware of: an easement appurtenant and one back-lot parcel. The owner and easement in gross. An appurtenant easement “attaches to land” and is of both sells the incapable of existence apart from the land to which it is attached. It is thus lakefront parcel, and necessarily connected with the use or enjoyment of the benefited parcel and keeps the back-lot for may pass with the benefited property when the property is transferred.28 himself. Still wanting to be able to access the lake, he works with an Referring back to our example in the previous section, an easement attorney to reserve an appurtenant would attach to both N and X. Thus, if N and X create an easement on the back- easement appurtenant for X to use N’s land to access the lake, then the ease- low property allowing ment would be enforceable against a subsequent purchaser of N’s property full riparian use. (i.e. the easement attaches and runs with the land). In such a case, property X | 12 would be the benefiting parcel and property N is burdened by the easement.

An easement in gross is one that benefits a particular person and not a par- ticular piece of land. For example, the owner of property N may grant any person an easement in gross: granting him or her the right to access the lake using N’s property. In that case, only the person holding the easement in gross may use N’s land. Unlike an easement appurtenant, an easement in gross only benefits the holder of the easement.

Sample Case: The Creation of an Easement by Express Grant Friendly Neighbors Homeowners in a neighborhood have An easement may be created by an express grant—which requires the historically used a instrument of conveyance to contain language that shows a clear intent strip of property in to create an easement. Like any instrument that creates or affects an interest the subdivision to in land, an easement must be in writing to satisfy the statute of frauds. launch and store their An express easement is treated and interpreted like a contract: (1) clear and boats. The neighbor 30 whose property abuts unambiguous language is enforced as written, and (2) the intent and un- the strip seeks to derstanding of the parties at the time the easement was created controls. enjoin the neighbor- hood’s collective and Because the language of the instrument determines the scope of the ease- individual uses. An ment holder’s rights, make sure you fully explain what it is that you want. Do attorney representing all the homeowners you only want to have the right to access the lake for fishing and swimming, establishes a pre- or would you also like to permanently anchor a boat? What about starting a scriptive easement bonfire on the beach? to allow them all to use the strip with full Also, as a side matter, the instrument creating the easement can go as far riparian rights. as assigning the responsibility to make and pay for improvements. It is thus advisable to see an attorney when it comes to drafting easements. To illustrate how important the language is, a Michigan case involved an easement that stated: “This easement is provided for access to the River and shores of Loon Lake by property owners in this subdivision.” There, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s holding that the easement granted only a “right of access to the use of the water” for the purpose of “swimming, fishing, bathing, wading and boating.” However, such ease- ment did not grant the right to “sunbathe” or to permanently moor. And even though the easement holders had the right to carry their boats to the waters, they could not store them permanently on the easement way, nor attach them to stakes driven into the land.31 The Creation of an Easement by Reservation

Imagine you own two parcels of property, with only one of them abutting the lake. Is there a way to sell one and “reserve” the right to access the lake from another? An easement by reservation is the way to do it. That is, you would English Influence sell the property abutting the lake and, in the same instrument of conveyance, English law influ- enced the entire you would reserve an easement in favor of the backlot parcel. However, keep American legal in mind that reserving a “right of way” for access does not give rise to ripar- system, not just ian rights, but only the right of ingress and egress.32 riparian rights. The Creation of an Easement by Prescription | 13

As far-fetched as this concept may seem, you would be surprised how many cases involve a dispute regarding whether a prescriptive easement Sample Case: Dock Encroachment has been created. That is, by virtue of using the land of another in a A lakefront home- certain manner and for a fixed amount of time, you are entitled to claim owner wants to an easement over that land. In legal terms, when a piece of land is being develop a neighboring used to access a waterbody, you might be able to claim a “prescriptive lot, but discovers the easement” if all the statutory requirements are met. owner next door had placed her dock within the lines In the majority of states, a prescriptive easement results from using another’s of his property. The property in an open, notorious, adverse, and continuous manner.33 It is dock has been there important, however, to recognize that the requirements vary from state to for more than fifteen state. In Michigan, for example, the person seeking a prescriptive ease- years. Knowing the neighbor would be ment bears the burden of demonstrating that the land has been used in able to establish a 34 such a manner for a period of 15 years. prescriptive easement or Use in an open and notorious manner simply means that the use of the in court, the owner’s property is not hidden. The use must be reasonably expected to provide attorney negotiates a sale of property over the owner of the land with notice, and an opportunity to assert his or her which the encroaching rights. In other words, secretly using your neighbor’s property over the dock sat. years to access a waterbody is not enough.

Adverse use is use that is inconsistent with the owner’s rights of the land being used. This means the use of land cannot be based on the landowner’s permission, and it must be that such use entitles the landowner to sue for trespass.35 Some states require that the use is also “under cover of claim or right.” In other words, you believed you had the right to use the path or Squatter’s Rights that you owned the portion in dispute. This element always seems to be in Through adverse dispute, especially when the court analyzes the communications that took possession, a place before the dispute arose. squatter can become an owner. While this legal 36 To illustrate, one case involved a family that used a parcel of land with principle serves frontage on Burt Lake, Michigan, for picnicking, swimming, sunbathing, a landowner no placing dinghies, and launching boats. They used that parcel for about 45 good, it is thought years, until their new neighbors erected a seawall that extended across part of to benefit society as a whole by putting the disputed area. The wall prevented the family from using the parcel as they land to the most always did, so they filed suit. Unfortunately, the family lost the case because beneficial use. The the revealed that they had once offered to purchase the disputed fact that adverse area, which, in turn, served as a recognition that the new neighbors pos- possession must be sessed superior title over that family. continuous for 15 years (in Michigan) gives the title Whether use is continuous depends on the nature of the use. For example, if holder ample time you own a summer home and had been using the walkway at issue for to evict the squat- 15 years every summer, such seasonal use is considered to be continu- ter. Thus, adverse ous use in most states. However, imagine that in one of these summers, possession not only rewards the squat- the owner of the parcel you have been using to access the lake asserts ter but also pun- his or her ownership. Or even worse, sues you for trespass. Such actions ishes the landowner by the true owner are deemed sufficient to “interrupt” the continuity that sits on his or required to prove an easement by prescription. her rights. | 14

Conclusion

ichigan’s lakes, numerous regional and national municipalities and agency boards, rivers and other publications, from the Detroit and on appeal to circuit courts. He waterbodies are News and Crain’s Detroit Busi- is a graduate of the University of incredible assets to ness to the Wall Street Journal and Detroit Mercy School of Law. M those who live on USA Today. Dan is a graduate of and near them. But the laws sur- Western Michigan University and rounding their use and access can the University of Detroit, School Adel Nucho be complicated, causing disputes of Law. [email protected] and confusion between neighbor- ing property owners. Adel Nucho is an attorney at Dal- Lawrence Opalewski ton & Tomich, PLC with a spe- If a neighbor or another individual [email protected] cial interest in water rights and is using your property to access property law. Prior to joining the the water without your permis- While he enjoys advocating for his firm, Adel gained valuable expe- sion, Michigan law gives you clients through litigation, Larry rience as a judicial extern in the the ability to defend and secure also seeks to solve problems out- United States District Court for your rights. The Michigan-based side the courtroom. He has been the Eastern District of Michigan. attorneys of Dalton & Tomich, PLC certified by the State of Michigan He graduated with honors from have helped current and future as a civil mediator, and he appre- the University of Detroit Mercy property owners from across our ciates the value of pre-litigation School of Law. Regardless of the great state do just that. Let us help conflict resolution. A published subject matter, Adel takes great you do the same. author, Larry is a graduate of the pride in providing outstanding University of Detroit Mercy School client service. of Law and Oakland University. About the Authors

Daniel P. Dalton Alexander Reuter [email protected] [email protected] Alexander Reuter is a passionate Named one of the top land use and accomplished litigator. He Dalton & Tomich, PLC and zoning attorneys in the Unit- represents property owners in all Attorneys at Law ed States by Martindale-Hubbell, facets of real matters, from Daniel P. Dalton has successfully boundary disputes to enforcing worked with hundreds of fellow easements and associated wa- 313.859.6000 Michiganders during his more ter rights. Alex has successfully than 28-year legal career. His represented both individuals and Find additional resources at expertise has been featured in developers, appearing before daltontomich.com/water | 15 References

1. Little v. Kin, 249 Mich. App. 14. Hall v. Wantz, 336 Mich. 112, Mich. App. 267, 270 (2007) 502, 504 (2002). 116 (1953). 29. Heydon v. MediaOne, 275 2. Adams v. Cleveland-Cliffs Iron 15. Hall v Wantz, 336 Mich. 112, Mich. App. 267, 270 (2007) Co., 602 N.W.2d 215, 218 (Mich. 116 (1953); Collins v Gerhardt, App. 1999). 237 Mich. 38, 47 (1926). 30. Wiggins v City of Burton, 291 Mich. App. 532, 551-552 (2011). 3. Eastbrook Homes, Inc. v. Treas. 16. Glass v. Goeckel, 473 Mich. 667, Dept., 820 N.W.2d 242, 249 682 (2005). 31. Delaney v. Pond, 350 Mich. (Mich. App. 2012). 685, 688 (1957). 17. Glass v. Goeckel, 473 Mich. 667, 4. Winter v. Mackie, 376 Mich. 11, 673 (2005). 32. Dyball v Lennox, 260 Mich. 19 (1965). App. 698, 706 (2004). 18. Glass v. Goeckel, 473 Mich. 667, 5. Winter v. Mackie, 376 Mich. 11, 679 (2005). 33. Heydon v. MediaOne, 739 19 (1965). N.W.2d 373, 377 (Mich. App. 19. Glass v. Goeckel, 473 Mich. 667, 2007). 6. MCL § 565.151. 674-75 (2005). 34. Heydon v. MediaOne, 739 7. NACG Leasing v. Dept. of 20. Glass v. Goeckel, 473 Mich. 667, N.W.2d 373, 377 (Mich. App. Treas., 843 N.W.2d 891, 892 674 (2005). 2007) (Mich. 2014). 21. NeBoShone Ass’n v State 35. Goodall v. Whitefish Hunting 8. Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Comm, 58 Mich. App. 324, 333 Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 646 Tr. v. U.S., 134 S. Ct. 1257, 1265 (1975). (1995). (2014). 22. Rice v Naimish, 8 Mich. App. 36. Swayze v. McMamee, Case no. 9. Kesti v. Aho, No. 316357, 2014 698, 703 (1967). 333793, 2017 WL 4654680, at *2 Mich. App. LEXIS 1247, at *5 (Ct. (Mich. App. Oct. 17, 2017). 23. Thies v. Howland, 424 Mich. App. June 26, 2014). 282, 288 (1985). 37. Colo. Const. art. XVI, § 6. 10. Buckley v. Mooney, 63 N.W.2d 24. W. Mich. Dock & Mkt. Corp. v. 655, 658 (Mich. 1954). 38. Nielson v. Newmyer, 228 P.2d Lakeland Invs., 210 Mich. App. 456, 458 (Colo. 1951). 11. Beach v. Lima Twp., 770 505, 513 (1995). N.W.2d 386, 392 (Mich. App. 25. Thies v. Howland, 424 Mich. 2009). 282, 288 (1985). 12. Martin v. Beldean, 677 N.W.2d 26. Bott v. Comm’n of Nat. Res. etc., 312, 317 n.19 (Mich. 2004) (citing 415 Mich. 45, 60 (1982). MCL 560.253). 27. Little v. Kin, 249 Mich. App. 502, 13. McCardel v. Smolen, 273 504-05 (2002). N.W.2d 3, 5 (Mich. 1978); Glass v. Goeckel, 473 Mich. 667, 672 n.1 28. Heydon v. MediaOne, 275 (2005).