Amethyst Land Co., Inc. v. Terhune

This appeal stemmed from a dispute between two adjoining landowners over an easement. In 2003, Respondent Amethyst Land Company acquired a quitclaim deed to an undeveloped twenty-two acre parcel (the 22-acre parcel) in the Santa Fe foothills. Amethyst searched the county property record and incorporated all of the documents concerning the property into corrected deeds. One of the documents it found and incorporated in the corrected deeds was an Extinguishment Agreement purporting to terminate an easement on "Tract 3" of adjoining property that benefitted the 22-acre parcel. Amethyst’s neighbors, Petitioners James and Elizabeth Terhune recorded the Extinguishment Agreement two years earlier, but five days after Amethyst’s predecessor-in-interest recorded its deed to the 22-acre parcel. The Terhunes denied Amethyst use of the easement, and Amethyst sued to quiet title. The district court found for the Terhunes. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the Extinguishment Agreement was invalid because it was filed late and the corrected deeds did not revive the agreement. Upon review, the Supreme Court held that the Extinguishment Agreement was valid and that by correcting its deeds, Amethyst incorporated the Extinguishment Agreement in full. View "Amethyst Land Co., Inc. v. Terhune" on Justia Law