Little v. Town of Hempstead, 29 N.Y.2d 435 (1972)

When a municipality condemns upland property to the high-water line, it acquires littoral rights, including the right to accretion, even if the adjacent submerged land remains in private ownership.

Summary

This case addresses riparian rights, specifically the right to accretion, when a town previously condemned upland property to the high-water line. The central issue is whether the town, by condemning the upland, became a littoral owner entitled to the benefit of land that subsequently accreted to the shoreline, or whether the previous owners of the submerged land retained title despite the accretion. The Court of Appeals held that the town, by virtue of the prior condemnation, acquired littoral rights, including the right to accretion. This decision broke the unity of title between the upland and submerged land, establishing a new relationship where the town gained littoral rights while the original owners retained the fee to the submerged lands, but without the benefit of the accreted land.

Facts

In 1952, the Town of Hempstead condemned upland property along the Atlantic Ocean to the high-water line for shoreline protection and a public park. The condemnation did not include land under water, which was owned by Little and Scolaro. After the 1952 condemnation, further accretion extended the shoreline over the submerged land. In 1959, the town initiated a second condemnation proceeding to acquire the claimants’ submerged land. The town argued that it had become the owner of the accreted land due to its littoral ownership acquired in 1952, and the claimants were not entitled to damages for the accreted land. The claimants argued the town’s ownership terminated at the 1952 high water mark.

Procedural History

The Special Term initially held that the Town did not acquire any riparian rights in the 1952 condemnation and the town’s ownership terminated at the high water line. The Appellate Division reversed, finding that the town acquired littoral rights in the initial condemnation, including the right to accretion. Following the Appellate Division’s reversal and new findings of fact, further proceedings were held at Special Term to determine damages. The case then returned to the Court of Appeals, after a final judgment was entered, to review the prior non-final order of the Appellate Division.

Issue(s)

Whether the Town of Hempstead, by condemning upland property to the high-water line in 1952, became a littoral owner entitled to the benefit of land that subsequently accreted to the shoreline, thereby extinguishing the rights of the prior owners of the submerged land to the accreted portion.

Holding

Yes, because when a municipality acquires upland to the high-water line through condemnation, it obtains the rights of a littoral owner, including the right to accretion, which alters the relationship between the upland and submerged land.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals relied on the principle established in Matter of City of Buffalo, which defines the rights of littoral or riparian ownership, noting that when land is increased by accretion, the new land belongs to the owner of the upland to which it attaches. The court reasoned that the 1952 condemnation broke the unity of title between the upland and the land under water, creating a new relationship. By acquiring the upland to the high-water line, the Town acquired littoral rights, including the right to accretion. The court stated that “a new relationship was created between the upland and the submerged land…In that new relationship, although the individual owners retained the fee to their respective submerged lands, the town acquired littoral rights.” The court emphasized that if a condemnor acquires upland to a water line, it gains the rights of the upland owner, including the right to accretion. The court distinguished the situation from one where the original upland owner’s access to the water is destroyed by accretion, stating that the Town stands in a different position as the littoral owner after the condemnation. The court affirmed the Appellate Division’s view that the town’s prior condemnation conferred littoral rights, leading to the town’s ownership of the accreted land. Ultimately the court decided the town became a littoral or riparian owner with the usual rights of such an owner from accretion.