## Facts

- Boone Creek is a tidal estuary in Talbot County, Maryland, connecting through a channel to the Choptank River and dividing into North and Southeast Branches.
- Sol’s Island lies near the branches’ confluence and was largely uninhabited and accessible only by air or water.
- Suzanne Hanks Litty acquired Sol’s Island in May 1986 and planned to build a residence there.
- In October 1986, the Littys obtained a U.S. Coast Guard permit for a private, one-lane, fixed bridge of roughly 240 feet with three feet of vertical clearance at mean high water.
- Nearby riparian owners along Boone Creek (the Beckers and others) alleged the bridge would block or materially impair their boating passage from their shoreline properties to the Choptank River, asserting other routes were too shallow.
- The Beckers claimed the bridge would interfere with their riparian rights, including practical access from their properties to navigable waters, and would constitute an obstruction to navigation.

## Issues

1. Whether riparian owners may seek injunctive relief against a permitted bridge when it allegedly obstructs their access from their properties to navigable waters.
2. Whether the Beckers had standing to sue by alleging and proving special injury different in kind from that suffered by the public generally.
3. Whether issuance of a U.S. Coast Guard bridge permit preempted or otherwise foreclosed state-law claims based on riparian rights or public nuisance concepts.
4. Whether the appellate court should remand for further fact-finding on navigability, alternative routes, and the extent of interference.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland vacated the intermediate appellate judgment and remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings and additional fact-finding.
- The court held that a Coast Guard permit did not automatically preempt or extinguish state-law claims by riparian owners.
- The court held the Beckers could potentially maintain an action if they proved special damages (an injury different in kind) or a direct impairment of riparian access rights.
- The court declined to resolve the ultimate merits because the record was inadequate on key factual matters bearing on standing and injury.

## Legal Principles

- The public right of navigation is generally enforceable by public authorities; a private plaintiff suing over an obstruction in navigable waters must ordinarily show special damages different in kind from the public at large.
- Riparian ownership includes a private property interest in practical access from the shore to navigable waters, subject to public rights and regulation.
- A federally issued bridge permit addresses federal navigation and safety concerns but does not conclusively adjudicate state-law private property rights; it is relevant evidence but not dispositive of riparian-rights disputes.
- When material factual gaps prevent proper resolution of standing and legally cognizable injury, appellate courts may remand for development of the record.

## Conclusion

The court held that federal permitting of a bridge did not, by itself, bar state riparian claims, and it remanded for fact-finding to determine whether the bridge would directly impair the plaintiffs’ riparian access or cause special injury sufficient to support private injunctive relief.


Becker v. Litty, 318 Md. 76, 566 A.2d 1101 (Md. 1989)