A Turtletown couple has filed a lawsuit against the county, a group of propertyowners, a bank, and an investment company for lack of access on Cheek Road to two subdivision lots.
A Turtletown couple has filed a lawsuit against the county, a group of propertyowners, a bank, and an investment company for lack of access on Cheek Road to two subdivision lots.
James and Norma O’Donnell filed the suit in Chancery Court Oct. 17 against propertyowners Rassie Cheek Jr., Jerry Lu Runion, John L. Cheek, Larry W. Cheek, Tommy K. Cheek, Ronald C. Cheek; BB&T; Polk County; and Taylor W. Jones and Savannah Investments, Inc.
The O’Donnells allege that “certain of the defendants, in general, and Rassie Cheek Jr., in particular, have begun to claim that Cheek Road is a private road.” They say they have been told not to use the road, schools buses and postal carriers have stopped using the road, and they have been subjected to threats of force and/or violence.
Polk County is named as a defendant because the Planning Commission approved Megan Trace Subdivision (now Hemlock Ridge Preserve Subdivision). The lawsuit notes that, according to the Subdivision Regulations, no subdivision plat may be approved unless lots front on a public road or a dedicated and accepted easement. The O’Donnells say they relied on the actions of the county in approving the subdivision, noting the plats show public access to their lots and other parcels over Cheek Road.
They say Cheek Road has been maintained as a public road and was shown on the county road list until the most recent version began to designate it as a private road. According to the O’Donnells, school buses have used Cheek Road for decades and mail has been delivered on the road. They say that Rassie Cheek “through various verbal demands” has caused the school buses to stop using Cheek Road and the mail delivery to stop. They say their daughter has to walk and/or cross a busy highway to board the school bus, they cannot receive mail, and delivery vehicles and other visitors cannot get to their property. In addition, there is a cloud on the title to the property and its value, so they cannot mortgage or sell except at greatly reduced prices and without clear access.
BB&T is named for Breach of Warranty because the bank sold Lot 1 to the O’Donnells, with a deed stating there is a road and utility easement over and across all private roads servicing the subdivision. They note that BB&T, as grantor, has stated that it will forever warrant and defend the title to the property, which they say has been impugned and clouded by the actions of Rassie W. Cheek Jr. and others.
Taylor W. Jones and Savannah Investment are also named for Breach of Warranty because they sold Lot 2 to the O’Donnells.
The O’Donnells ask Chancellor Jerri Bryant to declare Cheek Road to be a public road. In the alternative, they ask the Chancellor to declare Cheek Road to be an Easement by Necessity and/or an Easement by Implication because their property and the Cheeks’ property were derived from a common grantor but the O’Donnell’s property is now landlocked.
Another alternative is the declaration of an easement under the legal doctrine of Estoppel and/or acquiescence because the previous propertyowner used the road without interference for more than a year to build a residence. The O’Donnell’s note more than $370,000 was spent for the purchase and improvements to the property, relying on the designation of Cheek Road as a public road and on the Cheeks’ multiple failures to claim it was a private road. Therefore, the suit claims, the Cheeks cannot now claim it is a private road. They also say they are entitled to a declaration of an easement because of the length of time it was used without interference.
The couple is asking for a temporary restraining order and injunction prohibiting interference with access to their property and prohibiting the defendants from “taking any actions or threats against the persons and/or property.”
They are asking for judgments against BB&T and Taylor W. Jones/Savannah Investments for damages incurred in the defense of the title to their property, for breach of warranty, and/or for diminution of value of the property, and for legal costs.