New Hampshire Supreme Court Rejects “Stranger to the Deed” Doctrine

In simple terms, the “stranger to the deed” doctrine holds that parties to a transaction cannot create an easement benefitting a lot where the owner of that lot is not a party to the transaction.  For example, where A conveys Blackacre to B and reserves an easement over Blackacre for the benefit of Greenacre, no rights are created in Greenacre even where title to Blackacre references the purported easement.

Faced with an argument by a party seeking to invoke the doctrine (and thus deny the existence of an easement over "Blackacre" for the benefit of "Greenacre"), the New Hampshire Supreme Court declined to adopt the doctine, deciding instead to “adhere to interpretive principles that effectuate the intent of the parties.”  Lefevre v. Hogan, 2024 N.H. 38 (July 17, 2024).

Background

David and Amy LeFevre own residential property in Deering, New Hampshire (the LeFevre Lot), which abuts property owned by Tiffany and James Hogan (the Hogan Lot).  The properties were originally owned by The Board of Home Missions of the Congregations and Christian Churches (the Church).  In 1958, the Church conveyed the LeFevre Lot to Howard Spragg, who later conveyed it to himself and his wife, Jane Spragg.  In 1990, the Church conveyed 69.4 acres of adjacent land (from which the Hogan Lot would be created) to Deborah Spragg, who then conveyed it to Christopher Paul.

In 2002, Jane Spragg, having acquired Howard Spragg's interest upon his death, conveyed the LeFevre Lot to Lynne McEwan.  The deed excepted and reserved a 30-foot-wide "easement or right of way for the benefit of" the 69.4 acre parcel owned by Christopher Paul.  In 2007, McEwan conveyed the LeFevre Lot to the LeFevres.  The deed included the same easement reservation language.

Later that year, Christopher Paul conveyed the 69.4 acres to Casa Land & Timber, LLC (Casa).  The deed made no reference to the 30-foot-wide easement.  In other words, Casa took title to the 69.4 acres apparently without notice the land may be benefitted by the easement.

The following year Jane Spragg recorded a “Confirmatory Warranty Deed” to Casa that stated, in part:

This deed is to confirm that I reserved and intended to convey a right of way to and for the benefit of the Christopher F. Paul property (now owned by Casa Land and Timber, LLC) and intended that the right of way be attached to the Christopher F. Paul property….

Casa then subdivided the 69.4 acres and conveyed the Hogan Lot to Reginald Houle, who sold the parcel to Matthew MlCuch, who then sold the parcel to the Hogans.  The deeds into MlCuch and the Hogans both state the land is benefitted by the 30-foot-wide easement.

The dispute arose when the Hogans began using the easement to access their property.  The LeFevres filed an action to quiet title over the easement portion of their property and sought declaratory and injunctive relief.  The Hogans counterclaimed, asserting the easement was validly created by deed or, alternatively, by necessity or prescription.

Superior court proceedings

Pending final judgment, the superior court invoked the "stranger to the deed "doctrine in granting Lefevre a preliminary injunction preventing the Hogans from using the easement.  Prior to issuing a final ruling, the court received legal memoranda and additional evidence from the parties.  Based on those submissions, the court rejected the doctrine, ruling the 2002 Spragg-McEwan deed created a valid easement over the LeFevre Lot and entered judgment in favor of the Hogans.  The LeFevres appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

Supreme Court decision

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Hogans, stating the 2002 Spragg-McEwan deed created a valid easement over the LeFevre Lot.  The Court pointed to the clear language in the deed and the subsequent confirmatory deed that evidenced Jane Spragg's intent to grant the easement to Christopher Paul and his successors.

In doing so, the Court declined to adopt the "stranger to the deed" doctrine, emphasizing that New Hampshire law prioritizes the intent of the parties over formalistic common law doctrines.  The Court highlighted that modern authorities and jurisdictions have moved away from such archaic requirements, focusing instead on effectuating the parties' intentions.

The Court also found sufficient evidence of both delivery and acceptance of the easement.  The Court noted the deed was properly signed, acknowledged, and recorded, which constitutes prima facie evidence of delivery.  Furthermore, Jane Spragg's confirmatory deed provided clear evidence of her intent to convey the easement.  As the easement was beneficial to Christopher Paul, acceptance was presumed.  Thus, the Court upheld the trial court's decision, concluding that the easement was validly created and the Hogans were entitled to use it.

For assistance with easements, roads and other access issues, please contact our office by calling (603) 856-8411 or at this link.