Jon Friedmann was recently featured in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly for his analysis of a significant Massachusetts Appeals Court decision involving a long-running title dispute over waterfront property in Hull.
At the center of the case was a fundamental question: can a centuries-old property plan override modern ownership rights? The dispute centered on a parcel along Beach Avenue and whether Massachusetts’ derelict fee statute could be used to extinguish rights tied to an 1885 subdivision.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court answered no. Reversing a prior Land Court ruling, the court held that the statute did not apply because the parcel had already been conveyed to other parties decades earlier. The ruling makes clear that historical ownership transfers – not just what appears on a historic plan – are critical in determining title.
Jon agreed with the court’s reasoning. “I don’t think the derelict fee statute applies because of the factual underpinnings [of the case],” Jon said.
He also noted the decision’s value to practitioners, highlighting that the court succeeded in presenting a complex area of law in a clear and accessible way. “The beauty of the decision is that this is a very complex area, but in a complex decision, they were able to distill it down in a way that made it readable for practitioners,” Jon said.
The decision also leaves an important question unresolved. Because neither party challenged the statute’s constitutionality, the court did not address whether the derelict fee statute can be applied retroactively without violating due process.
Jon views that unanswered question as potentially significant. “If you’re reading between the lines of [D’Angelo’s dissent], the Legislature seemingly enacted something that may be unconstitutional,” he said. “He’s seemingly pointing towards the deprivation of property rights as an unconstitutional outgrowth of what the Legislature did. It is a real issue, and it’s interesting that no one has challenged it yet.”
For property owners, developers, and attorneys, the lesson is clear: historic records don’t just matter – they can determine modern ownership outcomes in unexpected ways. Careful review of title history – and awareness of evolving legal interpretations – remains essential when evaluating property rights.
The case now returns to the trial court, where additional claims, including adverse possession and prescriptive easement, remain to be decided. Regardless of the final outcome, the Appeals Court’s decision provides an important framework for analyzing complex title disputes—and highlights issues that may shape future litigation in Massachusetts.
Read the article, “Ruling leaves homeowners separated from beach lot,” on the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly website (subscription required).
