WPC  :Wx-Gv/k'GP="NNM],6wh.J<밗Gh4h܌|63`7YM(=yτh)*]f#/x"41`Rϝ!I)oeUs|%_bmge^Qh~d)JVܿFd#!xUN % 0:b' ^ / w ; 4E Y h mj   i U: NA A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 0VC D5 B AQ < 0V 0DX HP LaserJet 8000 DN PS0(I Z6Times New Roman Regular($USUS.,- -s='L U{Z='+003|xU     _ b"USUS.,  NקN  _  Ad FILEDX)Xק  September29,1999Cecil_Crowson_,Jr.AppellateCourt_ClerkdA _,OAZ"Arial Regular(.3$ !USUS.,  \\\\)!dxdx dabZc[C<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(.3$ !USUS.,  ($$   1  !USUS.,  _TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T  8dd8   Pv`[@0,j:`  `@E` 8ttxP,  v@   ! INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @(ATNASHVILLE #!  #Ԉ N CUMBERLANDBEND0 8 08T$8T$)p T$T$ INVESTORS,L.P.,0  08T$T$08T$8T$) T$T$   0      8   ) Plaintiff/Appellee,0 8 08T$8T$) T$T$   0      8   )0  AppealNo. T$T$   0      8   )0  01A019810CH00543 T$T$ VS.0 00 T$ T$00 T$0 T$0T$T$08T$T$08T$8T$)0T$T$, T$T$   0      8   )0  DavidsonChancery> T$T$   0      8   )0  953303IPT$T$ AMBROSEPRINTING0  08T$T$08T$8T$)bT$T$ COMPANY,INC.,0  08T$T$08T$8T$)$tT$T$   0      8   ) Defendant/Appellant.0 8 08T$8T$)HT$T$ @TTAPPEALFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFDAVIDSONCOUNTY@#ATNASHVILLE,TENNESSEE@_ _ THEHONORABLECLAUDIAL._BONNYMAN_,CHANCELLORNANCYS.JONESMICHAELG.STEWART_WALLER_Ԁ_LANSDEN_Ԁ_DORTCH_Ԁ&DAVIS511UnionStreet,Suite2100Nashville,Tennessee372198966 AttorneysforPlaintiff/AppelleeANTHONYJ._MCFARLAND_BASS,BERRY&SIMSPLC2700FirstAmericanCenterNashville,Tennessee372382700 AttorneyforDefendant/Appellant@$AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED  0      8     BENH._CANTRELL_,  0      8     PRESIDINGJUDGE,M.S.CONCUR:CAIN,J. ;63  P       _COTTRELL,J. P       @' $=޴ OPINION #޴ $=#Ԉ    0 AmbrosePrintingCompany,Inc.claimedaparkingeasementby  p prescriptionorbyimplicationinalotacrossthestreetfromitsofficebuilding. D  Theownerofthelot,CumberlandBendInvestors,L.P.,soughtadeclaratory h  judgmentonAmbrosesclaim.TheChanceryCourtofDavidsonCountygranted   summaryjudgmenttoCumberlandBend.Weaffirm.   @- I.  H   0 In1976Ambroseleasedabuildinginacommercialdevelopment D inNashvillecalled_MetroCenter_.Theowneragreedtofurnish100parking h spaces,eitheradjacenttotheleasedbuildingorontheownerslotacrossthe  street.Theownerelectedtodesignatealargelotacrossthestreetwhere   Ambrosesemployeescouldpark,alongwiththecustomersofotherbusinesses "$ inthearea.NoparticularspacesweredesignatedforAmbrosesuse. $H    0 ThebuildingleasedbyAmbroseandthelotacrossthestreetwere @)$" subsequentlytransferredtodifferentowners.In1980,inordertofacilitatethe d+&$ saleoftheparkinglot,Ambrosewasaskedtoacknowledgethatitsparkingneeds -(& wouldthereafterbefilledonlyonalotadjacenttoitsbuildingonthesameside /*( ofthestreet.Mr.Ambroseexecutedacertificateacknowledgingthatthe 1 -* landlordhaddesignatedanotherareatofulfilltheobligationtoprovideAmbrose 3D/, with100parkingspaces. 6h1.  <830   0 Apparentlythenewparkingspacesnevermaterialized,and  Ambrosesemployeescontinuedtosharetheparkinglotacrossthestreet.In $ 1981Mr.Ambrosewrotetotheowneroftheparkinglotaboutthesituation.His H letterendswiththissentence: Iassumewecancontinuetoparkthereuntilwe  l hearfromyoutothecontrary. @    0 In1982Ambroseboughtitsbuilding.Thedeeddoesnotconvey   anypropertyotherthanthebuildingandthelotuponwhichitstands;itdoesnot  mentionanyadditionalparkingspaces.     0 OnJuly13,1988,theowneroftheparkinglotphysicallyprevented h Ambrosesemployeesfromparkingthere.ThesecretaryoftheAmbrose < Corporationwrotetotheownersagent,assertingarighttoanunspecified ` numberofparkingspacesinthedisputedlot,basedontheoriginallease.On   September26ofthesameyear,theownerofthelotexpresslygrantedAmbroses " employees,guests,and_invitees_Ԁpermissiontoparkonthepavedportionofthe $  lot.Theownerreservedtherightto_redesignate_Ԁtheparkingareatoanothersite &@"  onfivedayswrittennotice. )d$"   0 TheAmbroseemployeescontinuedtoparkonthelotdespiteminor \-(& skirmishesovertherighttodoso.Finally,in1994CumberlandBend,whichhad /*( purchasedtheparkinglotin1992,filedthisactionforadeclaratoryjudgment 1,* thatAmbrosehadnorightorinterestintheparkinglot.TheChanceryCourtof 3/, DavidsonCountygrantedCumberlandBendsummaryjudgment. 5<1.  8`30 @qq- II.   @00! AnEasementbyPrescription  (   0 Ambroseclaimsaprescriptiveeasementto100parkingspaceson $ t CumberlandBendslot.ContrarytoCumberlandBendsargument,which H  consumesmostofitsbrief,Ambrosedoesnotinsistthatithasacquireditsrights l  bysevenyearsadversepossession.Ambroseconcedesthattoaffirmatively   establishaneasement,theadverseholdermustshowadverseuseforaperiodof  twentyyears.See_McCammon_Ԁ_v._ԀMeredith,830S.W.2d577(Tenn.App.1991), ( andtheusemustbe adverse,underclaimofright,continuous,uninterrupted, L open,visible,exclusive,andwiththeknowledgeandacquiescenceoftheowner  p ofthe_servient_Ԁtenant,andmustcontinueforthefullprescriptiveperiod.... D ЁHousev.Close,346S.W.2d445___at_Ԁ447(Tenn.App.1961). h   0 Ambrosecontends,however,thatoncetheadverseusehasstarted, " theownersrighttostopitwillbebarredaftersevenyearsbyTenn.CodeAnn. $$  282103.ThatCodesectionprovides: Nopersonoranyoneclaimingunder &H"  himshallhaveanyaction,eitheratlaworinequity,fortherecoveryofany )l$" lands,tenements,orhereditaments,butwithinseven(7)yearsaftertherightof @+&$ actionaccrued. d-(&   0 InShearerv._Vandergriff_,661S.W.2d680(Tenn.1983),our 1,* SupremeCourtappliedTenn.CodeAnn.282103toanactiontocompelthe 3 /, defendantstoremoveafencewhichpreventedtheplaintiffsfromusingan 5D1. easement.Inthatcasethepartiesownedadjoininglandwithathirtyfootright 8h30 ofwayrunningbetweenthem.Thecenterlineoftherightofwayranalongthe  propertyline.Oneoftheownerserectedafencedownthemiddleoftherightof $ wayandmorethansevenyearspassedwithoutanyactionbeingtakentohavethe H obstructionremoved.  l   0 TheplaintiffsarguedthatTenn.CodeAnn.282103didnotapply d  tosuitsinvolvingeasements,sincetwentyyearsofadverseusewasrequiredto   extinguishtheeasementaswellastoestablishit.SeeBoydv.Hunt,102Tenn.  495,52_S.W._Ԁ131(1899).TheSupremeCourtrejectedthiscontention,however,   andsaid: D 8 80 ! !  Wethinkthisreliancealsomisconstruesthe h interrelationofthedecisionallawofprescriptive *z creationandprescriptiveextinguishmentofrightsof < wayandthelimitingprovisionsof_T.C.A._Ԁ282103 N insuitsthereon.`0 0    0      8 *0  *0T$T$* @    T$T$ 8 80 ! !UndertheholdinginBoyd,arightofwaymaybe " extinguishedbytwenty(20)yearsadverseuse.Under #  _T.C.A._Ԁ282103,asuittoabatethisadverseuse $  mustbebroughtwithinseven(7)yearsfromthetime %.! thecauseofactionaroseortherightofactionis &@"  barred.Intheinterimperiodoftimebetweenthe (R#! seven(7)yearsandtwenty(20)years,iftheadverse )d$" holdingceases,thepersonwhohastherightofway &*v%# mayresumehisuse,astherightofwaystillexists. 8+&$ Ontheotherhandhemaynotbringanactiontoabate J,'% theadverseuseduringthatperiodandiftheadverse \-(& usecontinuesfortwenty(20)years,therightofway n.)' isextinguished./*(0 0  661S.W.2dat682. 1,*   0 AmbrosearguesthatShearerv._Vandergriff_isauthorityforits 5<1. position:thatoncesevenyearshaspassed,theowneroftheservienttenement 8`30 cannotinterferewiththeadverseuse,whichwillripenintoaneasementafter  twentyyears. $   0 Wethink,however,thatAmbroseismistaken,fortworeasons.  l First,subsection(b)ofTenn.CodeAnn.282103providesthattheadverse @  possessionshallnotbedeemedtoextendbeyondtheactualpossessionofthe d  adverseholderuntilsomemunimentoftitleisrecorded.SeeMoorev._Brannan_,   304S.W.2d660(Tenn.1957).SinceAmbrosehasneverhadactualpossession  ofanyparticularpartoftheparkinglot,thestatutedoesnotprovideadefenseto   thisaction. D   0 Second,beyondtheobviouslanguageofthestatute,thiscaseisthe < reverseofShearerv._Vandergriff_.InShearertheadversepossessioncovereda ` partofanestablishedeasement.Aftersevenyears,thestatuteoperatedtobaran   actiontohavetheobstructionremoved.Here,theactionwasbroughtfora " declarationthatAmbrosedidnothaveaneasement(ortopreventAmbroses $  claimfromripeningintoaneasement).Ifanactionforthatpurposeisbarred &@"  aftersevenyears,thetimerequiredforestablishingaprescriptiveeasementhas )d$" effectivelybeenshortenedfromtwentyyearstosevenyears.Aftersevenyears 8+&$ theadverseuserwouldbehomefree,solongashecouldholdonforthirteen \-(& moreyears.WethinkthedistinctionwemakehereisimplicitintheSupreme /*( CourtslanguageinShearer,wherethecourtreferredtothedifferencesin the 1,* decisionallawofprescriptivecreationandprescriptiveextinguishmentofrights 3/, ofway.661S.W.2dat682.Thus,Tenn.CodeAnn.282103isnotabarto 5<1. thisaction. 8`30 Ї  0 Theundisputedfactsinthiscaseshowthatatleastuntil1980  Ambrosewasusingtheparkinglotwiththepermissionoftheowner.Itslease $ providedthattheownerwouldfurnishthe100parkingspaces.In1980Ambrose H acknowledgedthatitdidnothaveanyrighttoparkonthelotacrossthestreet  l (apparentlyonthepromiseoftheownerthattheadditionalparkingwouldfinally @  beprovidednexttothebuilding.)Onlyaftertheadditionallotswerenot d  provideddidAmbroseclaimarighttothecontinueduseoftheparkinglot.   Therefore,regardlessofalltheotherquestionsaboutwhethertheusewas  permissiveoruninterrupted,Ambrosecannotshowtwentyyearsofadverseuse.   @qq- II. h @WW!AnEasementbyImplication  @   0 Whenaparcelofpropertyisdivided,aneasementbyimplication   preserves allthosecontinuousandapparenteasementswhichhaveinfactbeen " usedbytheownerduringtheunityofownershipandpossession.Powellv. $$  Riley,83Tenn.153at159(1885).InAllisonv.Allison,193S.W.2d476(Tenn. &H"  App.1945),theCourtoutlinedthethreeessentialfactorsforaneasementby )l$" implication: @+&$ 8 80 ! !  First,unityandaseparationofthetitle; d-(& second,thatbeforetheseparationtakesplace,theuse v.)' whichgivesrisetotheeasementshallhavebeenso /*( longcontinuedandsoobviousastoshowthatitwas 0+) meanttobepermanent;andthird,thattheeasement 1,* shallbe[reasonably]necessarytothebeneficial 2.+ enjoymentofthelandgrantedorretained.Rollov. 3 /, Nelson,34Utah116,96P.263,26_L.R.A._,N.S.315, 420- 324.5D1.0 0  193S.W.2dat478. 8h30  *9z41 Ї  0 Wearesatisfiedthattheundisputedfactsinthiscaseshowthatthe  firsttwofactorsareabsent.WhenAmbrosepurchaseditsbuildingin1982,title $ tothelotacrossthestreethadalreadypassedtoanotherowner.Ambrosehad H disclaimedanyrighttoparkonthatlotinordertofacilitatethesale.Therefore,  l Ambrosesvendorwasnolongertheowneroftheparkinglot,andtheneedfor @  theparkingspacesonthatparticularlotwerenotsoobviousastoshowthatthe d  righttoparktherewouldbepermanent.     0 Thejudgmentofthecourtbelowisaffirmedandthecauseis   remandedtotheChanceryCourtofDavidsonCountyforanyfurtherproceedings D thatmaybenecessary.Taxthecostsonappealtotheappellant. h   0      8   ______________________________     0      8   BENH.CANTRELL, !   0      8   PRESIDINGJUDGE,M.S. " CONCUR: %.! _____________________________ &*v%# WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE 8+&$ _____________________________ /*( PATRICIAJ.COTTRELL,JUDGE______ 0+) X   $=޴@. #޴ $=J#