THE ADIRONDACK LEAGUE CLUB, INC., APPELLANT, v. SIERRA CLUB, ET AL.,
RESPONDENTS. AND THE STATE OF NEW YORK ET AL., INTERVENORS-RESPONDENTS.
92 N.Y.2d 591, 706 N.E.2d 1192, 684 N.Y.S.2d 168 (1998).
December 17, 1998
3 No. 170
(98 NY Int. 0162)
Decided December 17, 1998
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
_________________________________________________________________
John S. Marwell, for appellant.
William S. Helmer, for intervenor-respondent SNY.
Philip H. Gitlen, for respondents Sierra Club.
John W. Caffry, for intervenor-respondent ADK.
Robert J. Kafin, for respondents Wolfe, et al.
New York Rivers United, et al.; Riverkeeper, Inc.;
Adirondack Landowners Association, et al.; and New York Farm
Bureau, Inc., amici curiae.
CIPARICK, J.:
This case presents the Court with the opportunity to decide to what
extent recreational use can be considered in determining whether a
river is navigable in fact. The river at issue is the South Branch of
the Moose River (the South Branch),twelve miles of which run through
property owned by plaintiff Adirondack League Club, Inc. (ALC). On
June 15, 1991, the individual defendants traveled down this portion of
the South Branch in two canoes and a kayak, an endeavor that required
several portages around various obstacles in the river. ALC, a private
club, preserves 50,000 acres around this portion of the South Branch
for use, including hunting and fishing, by its members. After
defendants' trip, ALC sued the Sierra Club, which organized the
excursion, and the five individual defendants, some of whom are
members of the Sierra Club, for trespass. ALC claims that this section
of the South Branch is its private property. Defendants counter that
because the South Branch is navigable in fact, they were entitled to
use the easement reserved to the public in all such waterways. The
State of New York and the Adirondack Mountain Club, Inc. intervened as
defendants and along with the other defendants moved for summary
judgment on the issue of navigability of this portion of the South
SNIPPETS:
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
John S. Marwell, for appellant.
William S. Helmer, for intervenor-respondent SNY.
Philip H. Gitlen, for respondents Sierra Club.
This case presents the Court with the opportunity to decide to what extent recreational use
The river at issue is the South Branch of the Moose River,twelve miles of which run through
On June 15, 1991, the individual defendants traveled down this portion of the South Branch in
The State of New York and the Adirondack Mountain Club, Inc. intervened as defendants and
This Court must decide, based on the common law standard of navigability in fact, whether
We hold, however, that evidence of the river's capacity for recreational use is in line with
Reliance on recreational uses, ALC asserts, would disrupt settled expectations regarding
If, however, a river is navigable in fact, it is considered a public highway, notwithstanding
If it is so far navigable or floatable in its natural state and its ordinary capacity, as to
Because "valuable products", namely timber, "would have had no avenue to market" the public
In addition to Morgan v King, ALC relies on Douglaston Manor, Inc. v Bahrakis, (89 NY2d 472)
Certainly, as all members of the Appellate Division panel held, evidence of recreational use
Summary judgment proofs have been assembled by the parties and intervenors and the
Former Justice Casey correctly summarized for the Majority at the Appellate Division that
Moreover, the successful voyage over the section of the River at issue by several
|
