Stitzel v. State of Maryland
Source
About This Legal Opinion
The appellate court upheld the trial court's finding on the holder's subdivision prohibition and its balancing decision, finding that MALPF's interest in preserving large blocks of agricultural land outweighed any harm to Stitzel.
Membership Required
This resource is a Land Trust Alliance member benefit for the staff, board and volunteers of land trust and affiliate member organizations, and Alliance donors at the Protector level.
Covered Bridge Farms II v. State of Maryland
Landowners granted portions of conserved land to separate LLCs--despite a no-subdivision clause. The easement-holder (the State of Maryland) contested the subdivision. The trial court ruled in favor of the easement-holder. The landowner appealed. The appeals court confirmed.
Taylor v. Taylor II
An appellate court in Ohio has upheld a division prohibition in a conservation easement The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision to nullify the division prohibition.
Birch Investments, LLC v. Keymer
The State and County objected to the tax foreclosure due to the division prohibition. The trial court agreed. The appellate court reversed, finding that revenue-raising outweighed the state goal of keeping whole farms intact. The court ruled the conservation easement survived the foreclosure.
Buckley v. Greensboro Land Trust
The court held for land trust on summary judgment, finding no implicit reasonable requirement in the subdivision prohibition provision.
Azrael v. Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation
The jurisdictional decision by the Court of Special Appeals essentially grants standing to neighbors to challenge any easement amendment decisions by MALPF, which is a quasi state agency. This decision adds to the holding of Long Green Valley Ass'n v. Bellevale Farms, Inc.
Mohonk Preserve v Pardini, Fink, and Taylor II
The trial court conducted a lengthy bench trial and ultimately ruled in favor of challenger to land trust title. The appellate court reversed, finding several flaws with the trial court's analysis.
Amaral v. City of Gloucester
Trial court finds that legislation approving conversion of park satisfied state constitutional requirements. This is the appellate court’s decision affirming the trial court.
Turner v. Trust for Public Land
The appellate court affirmed the trial court, holding that so long as any profit is used to further its charitable objectives, it is acting consistently with its nonprofit status and that managing the property for conservation by leaving it in its natural state is not the absence of any use.
Mesa County Land Conservancy v. Allen – Opinion from Appeals Court
In three separate orders, the trial court upheld MLT's claims (except on attorney fees) and denied Allen's motions for summary judgment finding that the easement's restrictions on water rights did apply to Allen.
Cook v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Agriculture
The statute governing the easement program provided that a subdivision of an eased property would be allowed 'if subdividing will not harm the economic viability of the restricted land for agricultural production.' The court vacated the rejection of the subdivision and remanded for a hearing.