prescriptive easement claim in Rhode Island

2013Furthermore, defendant contends that the prescriptive-easement claim lodged in the amended complaint does not “relate back” to the date of the initial complaint under Rule 15(c), because the claim “sets forth new facts as well as a new legal theory.” Rule 8(a) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure requires that “[a] pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, * * * shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (2) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks.” This Court has held that “[a] pleading need not i

2007See Gardner v. Baird , 871 A.2d 949 , 954 (R.I. 2005) (citing Stone v. Greenhill Civic Ass'n, Inc. , 786 A.2d 387 , 391 (R.I. 2001) ("Factual determinations are generally necessary to determine *Page 22 whether the claimants have established the elements of a prescriptive easement.") While Defendant has provided some evidence regarding its claim in the form of affidavits, such a scant amount of evidence cannot be considered sufficient to satisfy the elevated standard of proof required with regard to each element of a prescriptive easement claim. 13 Accordingly, the issue cannot properly be dec

2026See Clark, 226 A.3d at 690 (brackets omitted) (“To obtain property by adverse possession, * * * a claimant must prove actual, open, notorious, hostile, continuous, and exclusive use of * * * property under a claim of right for at least a period of ten years.”) (quoting DiPippo, 63 A.3d at 508 ); Drescher v. Johannessen, 45 A.3d 1218, 1227 (R.I. 2012) (“To establish an easement by prescription, a claimant must show actual, open, notorious, hostile, and continuous use under a claim of right for at least ten years.”) (quoting Hilley v. - 23 - Lawrence, 972 A.2d 643, 651-52 (R.I. 2009)).

2026See Clark, 226 A.3d at 690 (brackets omitted) (“To obtain property by adverse possession, * * * a claimant must prove actual, open, notorious, hostile, continuous, and exclusive use of * * * property under a claim of right for at least a period of ten years.”) (quoting DiPippo, 63 A.3d at 508 ); Drescher v. Johannessen, 45 A.3d 1218, 1227 (R.I. 2012) (“To establish an easement by prescription, a claimant must show actual, open, notorious, hostile, and continuous use under a claim of right for at least ten years.”) (quoting Hilley v. - 23 - Lawrence, 972 A.2d 643, 651-52 (R.I. 2009)).

2026See Clark, 226 A.3d at 690 (brackets omitted) (“To obtain property by adverse possession, * * * a claimant must prove actual, open, notorious, hostile, continuous, and exclusive use of * * * property under a claim of right for at least a period of ten years.”) (quoting DiPippo, 63 A.3d at 508 ); Drescher v. Johannessen, 45 A.3d 1218, 1227 (R.I. 2012) (“To establish an easement by prescription, a claimant must show actual, open, notorious, hostile, and continuous use under a claim of right for at least ten years.”) (quoting Hilley v. - 23 - Lawrence, 972 A.2d 643, 651-52 (R.I. 2009)).

2015As this Court has previously explained, the hostility element of a prescriptive-easement claim is satisfied “if one goes upon the land openly and uses it adversely to the true owner * * *.” Butterfly Realty v. James Romanella & Sons, Inc., 45 A.3d 584, 589 (R.I. 2012) (quoting Reitsma v. Pascoag Reservoir & Dam, LLC, 774 A.2d 826, 831 (R.I. 2001)).

2015“Similarly, ‘a claim of right may be proven through evidence of open, visible acts or declarations, accompanied by use of the property in an objectively observable manner that is inconsistent with the rights of the record owner.’ ” Drescher, 45 A.3d at 1228 (quoting Tavares v. Beck, 814 A.2d 346, 351 (R.I.2003)).

2015As this Court has previously explained, the hostility element of a prescriptive-easement claim is satisfied “if one goes upon the land openly and uses it adversely to the true owner * * *.” Butterfly Realty v. James Romanella & Sons, Inc., 45 A.3d 584, 589 (R.I. 2012) (quoting Reitsma v. Pascoag Reservoir & Dam, LLC, 774 A.2d 826, 831 (R.I. 2001)).

2013Furthermore, defendant contends that the prescriptive-easement claim lodged in the amended complaint does not “relate back” to the date of the initial complaint under Rule 15(c), because the claim “sets forth new facts as well as a new legal theory.” Rule 8(a) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure requires that “[a] pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, * * * shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (2) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks.” This Court has held that “[a] pleading need not i

2013Rather, “[t]he pleading simply must provide the opposing party with ‘fair and adequate notice of the type of claim being asserted.’ ” Id. (quoting Haley, 611 A.2d at 848 ).

2007“Rule 52(a) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure requires the trial justice in a nonjury trial to make specific findings of fact upon which he [or she] bases his decision.” White v. LeClerc, 468 A.2d 289, 290 (R.I.1983).

2007See Gardner v. Baird , 871 A.2d 949 , 954 (R.I. 2005) (citing Stone v. Greenhill Civic Ass'n, Inc. , 786 A.2d 387 , 391 (R.I. 2001) ("Factual determinations are generally necessary to determine *Page 22 whether the claimants have established the elements of a prescriptive easement.") While Defendant has provided some evidence regarding its claim in the form of affidavits, such a scant amount of evidence cannot be considered sufficient to satisfy the elevated standard of proof required with regard to each element of a prescriptive easement claim. 13 Accordingly, the issue cannot properly be dec