Originally Posted by chuckinca (Post 724999)

Cart travel from Stonecrest to Spanish Springs and Lake Sumpter Landing could be done using the dirt (aka sand) and paved trails with approval of all owners/public roads from Walmart to the now blocked cart access to Paradise Drive and from there on public streets and the cart bridge over 441/27, a public highway. Use of Villages owned intermodal paths is not required and not an issue concerning access to Paradise Drive - a public roadway.

Blocking public access to public roadways is illegal as noted in the prior noted order by the Town of Lady Lake to remove the cart gate at the access to Paradise drive and the requirement that all Villages gates can be opened by a push button on the gate.

Mr Morse: TAKE DOWN YOUR ILLEGAL WALL!

.

Originally Posted by JeffAVEWS (Post 724899)

I'll post this again, I still think there is easement there! This should by fodder for the POA's lawyers.

Easement by estoppel

When a property owner misrepresents the existence of an easement while selling a property and does not include an express easement in the deed to the buyer, the court may step in and create an easement. Easements by estoppel generally look to any promises not made in writing, any money spent by the benefiting party in reliance on the representations of the burdened party. If the court finds that the buyer acted in good faith and relied on the seller's promises, the court will create an easement by estoppel.

For example: Ray sells land to Joe on the promise that Joe can use Ray's driveway and bridge to the main road at anytime, but Ray does not include the easement in the deed to the land. Joe, deciding that the land is now worth the price, builds a house and connects a garage to Ray's driveway. If Ray (or his successors) later decides to gate off the driveway and prevents Joe (or Joe's successors) from accessing the driveway, a court would likely find an easement by estoppel.

Because Joe purchased the land assuming that there would be access to the bridge and the driveway and Joe then paid for a house and a connection, Joe can be said to rely on Ray's promise of an easement. Ray materially misrepresented the facts to Joe. In order to preserve equity, the court will likely find an easement by estoppel.

On the other hand, if Ray had offered access to the bridge and driveway after selling Joe the land, there may not be an easement by estoppel. In this instance, it is merely inconvenient if Ray revokes access to the driveway. Joe did not purchase the land and build the house in reliance on access to the driveway and bridge. Joe will need to find a separate theory to justify an easement.

Originally Posted by rubicon (Post 725039)

The more I hear about this issue the more I am convinced that something else is going on and the wall placement is justified.
Again I believe the Developer is an excellent businessman and if anyone thinks he would be foolish enough to leave himself exposed, well there is this bridge in Brooklyn

Originally Posted by Peachie (Post 724991)

Steve, I fully understand why those two subdivisions are private but the cart paths in The Villages are not built and maintained with tax dollars either, they are private also.

This quote below is from this thread and is what makes me think that there are Stonecrest residents who planned their travel by using the private pathways in The Villages. Village residents have not been granted reciprocity by Stonecrest to use their streets.

The quote: "While we do not live in the villages. We do most of our grocery shopping ,dining out, go to the farmers market, purchase from the venders at the squares, and purchase from the various retailers in the villages. With the golf cart access blocked we will no longer be able to help support theses business. While we will miss the villages it will be at the expense of the businesses in the villages. We are sure there are a great number of people living here that feel the same way." End of quote.


Surely Stonecrest residents understand why the Morse's may not want to subsidize their lifestyle and travel on our private paths anymore than Stonecrest residents want to subsidize Villagers using their streets.

Originally Posted by buggyone (Post 725042)

Absolutely right. Also, do not forget that the Developer has an excellent team of well-paid attorneys if there would be any legal challenges.

Originally Posted by Peachie (Post 725025)

Chuckinca, I could be wrong but isn't the cement path from the medical complex to the streets private and also the blacktop path from the street all the way over to the bridge private also? Is the bridge public or private? I think it's pretty much the way the rest of The Villages operates.

Originally Posted by JeffAVEWS (Post 725046)

Let’s consider this. The owner of the property established a right-of-way; He made improvements, paved it and installed lighting, for the sole purpose of providing access for foot, bicycle, or golf cart passage thru his property. He maintained the access, made repairs to the lights and landscaped the property. He also erected a gate to limit that access, but was ordered to remove the gate because it blocked a public street. If the Town of Lady Lake had legal standing to require the removal of the gate, they have the same authority to require the removal of the wall.

Originally Posted by buggyone (Post 725042)

Absolutely right. Also, do not forget that the Developer has an excellent team of well-paid attorneys if there would be any legal challenges.

Originally Posted by NoMoSno (Post 725049)

His well paid attorneys didn't fair to well in this case:
Villages settles lawsuit, will fund $40 million in recreation upgrades

Revenge for the historic side?...

Originally Posted by ttown (Post 725021)

Good question. The path was paved with pavers and well landscaped. The grass along the sides was mowed.Who payed for it?
Anytime people from Stonecrest, Spruce Creek, Water Oak, Harbor Hills ,etc, want to get to Village facilities they can hop in a car.
The only unpaved section of the whole trip to Lowes was a small section just before entering the road to the stores. From Aldis to Walmart was also not paved.

Originally Posted by Steve9930 (Post 725054)

Now lets see is they have the will power to go against big money?

Originally Posted by rp001 (Post 725060)

He, Morse, would just change out the city's elected officials, just as he did in Sumter county..Raise them, train them, finance them, then get them elected..