## Facts

- P & W Co. (PWC) acquired a large tract on the north shore of Lake Travis to develop the Travis Peak Estates subdivision.
- In 1962, PWC prepared (but did not record) a subdivision plat showing tract lines, a 50-foot roadway easement leading to the lake, and a four-acre “Lakeside Tract” labeled “EASEMENT AREA FOR USE OF TRAVIS PEAK ESTATES OWNERS.”
- PWC later did not preserve the original plat, but in January 1963 it recorded a metes-and-bounds description in the county deed records describing both the roadway easement and the Lakeside Tract, identifying the Lakeside Tract as an “easement area.”
- PWC cleared the Lakeside Tract, built a road along the roadway easement, and constructed a concrete boat ramp on the Lakeside Tract.
- From the 1960s forward, PWC marketed and sold subdivision tracts and, to induce purchases, informed prospective buyers that the Lakeside Tract was a common-use easement area and provided purchasers copies of the plat showing that designation.
- Many subdivision tracts lacked direct waterfront access, and owners used the Lakeside Tract for lake access and recreation for decades without interruption.
- Owners also used a small adjacent area next to the Lakeside Tract (about 917 square feet), together with the boat ramp, as a practical turnaround space for vehicles and boat trailers.
- Craig and Sheila Nickels purchased two tracts in the subdivision; their purchases included the Lakeside Tract and the tract containing the adjacent turnaround area.
- The Nickelses’ deeds and title materials referenced the recorded easement description and referred to the unrecorded plat; one purchase contract also included a drawing depicting the Lakeside Tract as an easement area with a ramp.
- After buying the property, the Nickelses disputed other owners’ rights to use the Lakeside Tract and filed suit for declaratory relief; the other owners counterclaimed, asserting an express easement and, alternatively, easement by estoppel and prescription.
- The trial court declared that subdivision owners held easement rights in the Lakeside Tract and the adjacent area, granted injunctive relief against interference, and awarded attorney’s fees to the owners; the Nickelses appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence and governing instruments supported a declaration that subdivision owners held an express easement to use the Lakeside Tract for lake access and recreation/private park use.
2. Whether the easement rights found by the trial court extended to the adjacent turnaround area used with the boat ramp.
3. Whether the Nickelses took title subject to those easement rights based on record notice and related references in their chain of title and purchase documents.
4. Whether the trial court properly granted injunctive relief and awarded attorney’s fees in the declaratory-judgment action.

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s declaration that subdivision owners have easement rights to use the Lakeside Tract for recreation/private park purposes and lake access.
- The court affirmed the judgment recognizing easement rights in the adjacent turnaround area as part of the use associated with access to and use of the boat ramp.
- The court affirmed the injunction preventing the Nickelses from interfering with the easement rights.
- The court affirmed the award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing subdivision owners under the Declaratory Judgments Act.

## Legal Principles

- An express easement may be created by a written, recorded instrument that shows intent to grant an easement and describes the servient property with reasonable certainty; related documents and surrounding circumstances may be used to construe the grant.
- Even if a subdivision plat is not recorded, consistent references to it in transactions and its use in marketing may help show the developer’s intent regarding common-use areas.
- Purchasers who take title with actual or record notice of an easement (including deed references to recorded easement descriptions and related documents) generally take subject to the easement.
- The scope of an easement is determined from the creating instrument and the purpose shown by the developer’s plan and long-standing use; courts may treat access-related features reasonably tied to the easement’s use (such as a boat-launch turnaround) as within the easement rights recognized.
- In a declaratory-judgment action resolving a real dispute about property rights, a court may issue injunctive relief to protect the declared rights and may award reasonable and equitable attorney’s fees.

## Conclusion

The court of appeals affirmed a judgment declaring that Travis Peak Estates owners hold easement rights to use the Lakeside Tract on Lake Travis for recreation/private park use and lake access, affirmed that the rights extended to the adjacent turnaround area used with the boat ramp, and affirmed the related injunction and attorney’s fees award in the declaratory-judgment action.


Nickels v. Casburg, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 4555 (2009)