Jump to content

Judge Reverses Finding On Ownership of Truck Beach In Amagansett

Rate this topic


TBD

Recommended Posts

From The Southampton Press
 
By Michael Wright

A state judge has reversed his own earlier ruling regarding the ownership of a stretch of beach in Amagansett, clearing the way for a lawsuit between a group of property owners in Amagansett and Napeague and the East Hampton Town Trustees to proceed to trial.

Judge Jerry Garguilo issued a ruling earlier this month that stepped back from a ruling he issued last year, one that appeared to conclude that the homeowners had no ownership rights to the stretch of beach that separates their homes from the Atlantic Ocean. It has become a controversial issue over its use by four-wheel-drive vehicles in summer.

“This is a very good decision, because it clarifies what I thought was clearly a mistake,” attorney Steve Angel, who represents the homeowners, said on Tuesday. “We have an unbroken chain of title back to the deed from the [East Hampton Town Trustees] to Arthur W. Benson in 1882.”

Judge Garguilo had based his previous decision—that the homeowners did not, in fact, have a claim of ownership over the beach—on notations on the decades-old surveys of some of the properties, which seemed to indicate that the developers did not claim to have title to the beach seaward of the crest of the dune. The claim was the only part of the case that the judge had issued a summary judgment on, leaving the bulk of two parallel lawsuits dealing with separate beach areas to be argued at trial.

Mr. Angel, the attorney for the plaintiffs, had appealed to re-argue the claim of the ownership. The judge’s change of tune after hearing the new arguments adds the issue to the list of points to be heard at an eventual trial.

Mr. Angel said he would not expect the trial in the case to begin until at least early 2016, and possibly many months later.

East Hampton Town has said it plans to condemn the beach, widely known as “Truck Beach,” in an effort to head off the homeowners’ attempts to block the four-wheel-drives from using the beach during the day in summertime.

 

TBD

CC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously I can't put myself in the homeowners position, but I sometimes wonder if I had the money and went and bought a beachfront home knowing there was already access to the public behind my house, would I still be such a d-bag sweetheart homeowner and try and prevent them from doing something they were doing before I showed up. I guess only those who can afford to live there can answer that.

 

I am sure most of them were balloon knots before they moved there. :howdy:

Former LIBBA #1818

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This new ruling was expected and that is why a few hundred East Hampton locals stumped for and asked our town legislators to  push for condemnation.

Its taken  SIX   years of  back and forth,however our town council has hired attorneys to condemn the beach  for the good of the public.

I sincerely believe that this will be achieved.  Then the public will still have the right to WALK and drive on that beach and the HOMEOWNERS will have spent  hundreds of thousands of dollars paying the same law firm that took on the South Hampton trustees and CASTRATED them,but in this case the public will see a more favorable result.

 

There are many who believe (this has been said by a few officials) that this was simply a land grab in an effort for the homeowners to raise the value of their properties.  Lets face it, owning your own private beach is good for your resale value.

Lets see who has the last laugh and whose property values go the wrong way?

 

I don't know if any of you used to watch the SOPRANOS on HBO.  But there's one  episode where a conniving lawyer refuses to let Tony out of a purchase of his beach front property home.  Actually  I think it was  a downpayment  that he refused to refund. Then Tony has a few of his boys take a boat and plant themselves in the  bay in front of the lawyer's house.

All night long, for several days, they played Dean Martin music at the highest decibels,until the lawyer relents and lets Tony out of the deal.

 

These  people with their smug attitudes have really pissed a lot of locals off.

I have my rat pack collection of old albums all ready for the big event.  

Lets see Deano  or Frankie or Sammy or maybe the constant  blaring of Lawrance Welk Polka music.

Instead of "truck beach",how about POLKA BEACH? :laugh:

Edited by JettyGuy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wonder when the public wins the rights to the beach back if TBD will post that article.

 

all the money in the world can't buy class

If you try to change it, you will ruin it. Try to hold it, and you will lose it.

 

Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do recall that Sopranos episode!  it was really hilarious!  Although I did not miss any episode.

 

Polka is too soft, I would go with Led Zepelin, Dazed and Confused and let it repeat over and over and over....

 

It's not often they make such series where the entire family would enjoy watching: it was not just for crime hungry dudes, nor lovie dovie movies with deep theme and romance wifes, nor weird creepy scene for the younger ones....I am waiting to see how good the new True Detective will be,..

 

It seems to me these actions are intended to polarize the community against the few greedy homeowners who want to own the beach, which can not be owned.

 

The way I see it, they have a weak case, and thus if they lose it, then this case will become the basis for any other similar cases.

Edited by FishinKid007

Slot Limit for Striped Bass; 1 fish 26"-34"

Save the Porgy; Bring Back 10 fish daily limit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kid ,the reality is that the public still has a few  strings to pull.

 

I wish that I could telegraph something,because it would be uplifting. 

For me it is next to impossible to keep my big blabber shut....so it's killing me.

But I will say this ,without giving away the family secrets....they'll be some very smart candidates running for elected positions who are very pro-  public beach access.

A few in particular will have tremendous pull in both South Hampton and East Hampton.

Also very strong ties to Albany.

 

Remember that it has been discussed here that the only way to beat these D-Bags is to have people who have political clout who favor the public's right to access on our side.

Also remember that we discussed  the significance of  having the funds to wage war legally....the times they are a changing.

You bully enough people too long.....and they fight back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously I can't put myself in the homeowners position, but I sometimes wonder if I had the money and went and bought a beachfront home knowing there was already access to the public behind my house, would I still be such a d-bag ******* homeowner and try and prevent them from doing something they were doing before I showed up. I guess only those who can afford to live there can answer that.

 

I am sure most of them were *******s before they moved there. :howdy:

 

In my mind, if they were legally there and you tried to outlaw it, you would be a d-bag.

 

If they were there illegally, you would be serving your family a fiduciary responsibility by ridding illegality and protecting the value of your investment.

 

As for the illegality having been there before you bought the house -  illegal is illegal no mater who git there first.  ;)

TBD

CC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my mind, if they were legally there and you tried to outlaw it, you would be a d-bag.

 

If they were there illegally, you would be serving your family a fiduciary responsibility by ridding illegality and protecting the value of your investment.

 

As for the illegality having been there before you bought the house -  illegal is illegal no mater who git there first.  ;)

 

I'll play....

 

The current situation is that it is perfectly legal to drive on the beach right now, correct?

 

So, if they are legally allowed to drive there now, how long has this been in effect? How long ago was it illegal, if it ever was?

 

If it was illegal at some point, how many of the current homeowners living there now, lived there when it was illegal?

 

How many houses existed when/if it was illegal compared to today?

 

Let's get some background information so we can all be on the same page because I don't understand what started this whole issue in the first place. :howdy:

Former LIBBA #1818

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok  here's the background.  Since 1686 give or take a few years,the public has been allowed to continuously pass and repass along this beach.

Then in 1882 a real-estate  developer named  Benson  bought most of what was known as Montauk .  The problem was at the time the TRUSTEES back then (it was argued in court) went against their charter of preserving and caring for the beach for the good of the public,by selling the  beach at Napeague to this land developer.

At the time, in 1882, the Trustees were both brains and cash short.

 

Even so people were allowed to CONTINUOUSLY walk, ride their horses,travel by wagon or cart and then by the late thirties drive vehicles on what is now the disputed  beaches. There are two beaches along the Napeague stretch being disputed.

Thus there was a public easement of sorts and not even the mention that passing and repassing on said beach was illegal for the LAST 300 years or so!!!!!

Never has there been a ticket written for any East Hampton or visiting driver on that beach with regard to the sale to Benson.

 

Now back in the fifties people began  slowly  building homes on the beaches(some  building was done  a little earlier I am told) but for the most part there were very few  homes 

built on Napeague  before the fifties.  The homeowners and the few  beach  drivers lived in harmony until about 2009, when the homeowners  felt that there were too many  trucks.   They brought suit against both the East Hampton Town Council and the East Hampton trustees.

In their suit there is a TRESPASS clause....these delightful D-BAGS want to keep people from walking on the sand near their homes as well as keep all vehicles off the sand near their homes.  A real bunch of sweethearts!

 

Now historically, and more importantly, since 1930 vehicles have been allowed to drive on the beaches that are being  disputed.

The tradition for the last 50 years is that the local people have this ONE beach where they can congregate  with friends and family,where the beach is open all day long.

 Generally during the summer time during the week you might find thirty trucks  parked there. On a weekend maybe 50.  On major holiday a little more than that.

It's mostly a weekend  and holiday type of family  beach where fishing and surfing,body surfing are typically done.

The crowd in my opinion are 99% very well behaved and there has NEVER been a safety issue in 300 years where someone was actually seriously injured due to a vehicle!

 

The homeowners demanded that they wanted no trucks on the beach,complaining that the public was noisy,driving in a manner that put their safety at risk,walking dogs and allowing them to poop near their homes,getting drunk and basically behaving poorly. 

Our MODERN day trustees told most of the homeowners(the majority who had bought their homes in MODERN DAY America..that they shouldn't have bought a home on public beach without expecting the public to be able to ACCESS said  beach and  to congregate. They pointed to the fact that this was on them and that they should have done their due diligence  before buying!

 

We have all known(those who live in E.H. )that this day was coming.  We banded together and started C-far,Citizens for Access rights, just to fight this LAND GRAB and to

ENCOURAGE our town and our trustees not to give in to this LAND GRAB and public  disenfranchisement.  From day one we knew that a developer had sold the land,even though the selling of the land was an illegal act that was forbidden in the charter that was granted to the trustees.

We all knew that some D-Bag Judge, that had no familiarity with the traditions of our town,might very well side with the homeowners.

 

Our goal(C-far's goal) was to convince  our town and our trustees to keep these beaches public beaches and to recognize that especially on these beaches the old,the very young,  families,the frail, the sick, the injured,sportspeople,etc. need  a vehicle to access this  beach.

Our  MAIN goal, which we achieved, was to have our town Government agree to CONDEMN the beach for the good of the public.

I spoke with our town supervisor recently who said"WE can't allow this to happen!!"  I believe that he is sincere and what makes me believe this is that our town has hired a  law firm that specializes in  Beach Condemnation and all of the related law!

 

What remains to be seen is whether or not we will hold strong and be triumphant.

Edited by JettyGuy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll play....

 

The current situation is that it is perfectly legal to drive on the beach right now, correct?

 

So, if they are legally allowed to drive there now, how long has this been in effect? How long ago was it illegal, if it ever was?

 

If it was illegal at some point, how many of the current homeowners living there now, lived there when it was illegal?

 

How many houses existed when/if it was illegal compared to today?

 

Let's get some background information so we can all be on the same page because I don't understand what started this whole issue in the first place. :howdy:

 

 

Leather - I'm always up for an argument, but I don't know enough about how long and how it became truck beach. I only know from articles I read, and its the first time I recall the homeowners claim they have title to the area beyond their dunes whereas most of easthampton town, that is not the case.

TBD

CC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leather - I'm always up for an argument, but I don't know enough about how long and how it became truck beach. I only know from articles I read, and its the first time I recall the homeowners claim they have title to the area beyond their dunes whereas most of easthampton town, that is not the case.

 

Well, it's good we have Jetty here to fill us in. He seems to know more than most and is definitely a lot more passionate about it.

Former LIBBA #1818

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's good we have Jetty here to fill us in. He seems to know more than most and is definitely a lot more passionate about it.

 

Should I refrain from updating the forum with these articles? As I said in the past, I simply do so because I feel they are interesting articles that many dont have access to.

TBD

CC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...