JACK COOPERSMITH et al
Argued: November 6, 2014.
On the briefs: Aaron K. Baltes, Esq., Norman, Hanson & DeTroy, LLC, Portland, for appellant Testa's, Inc.
David A. Soley, Esq., and Glenn Israel, Esq., Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, Portland, for appellees Jack N. Coopersmith, Sherri L. Coopersmith, Tourmaline King, LLC, and Tourmaline Queen, LLC.
Gerald O. Fournier, Esq., Richardson, Whitman, Large and Badger, Bangor, for appellees Jack N. Coopersmith and Sherri L. Coopersmith.
At oral argument: Aaron K. Baltes Esq., for appellant Testa's, Inc.
David Soley for appellees Jack N. Coopersmith, Sherri L. Coopersmith, Tourmaline King, LLC, and Tourmaline Queen, LLC.
Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, SILVER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, and HJELM, JJ.
[¶1] Testa's, Inc., appeals from a judgment entered in the Business and Consumer Docket ( Nivison, J.) after a bench trial, finding that a 1978 agreement granted an appurtenant easement over property belonging to Testa's for the benefit of Jack and Sherri Coopersmith's predecessors-in-title. Testa's contends that the court erred in concluding that (1) the 1978 agreement was enforceable and created an easement, and (2) alternatively, the Coopersmiths have a prescriptive easement over the Testa's property. We affirm the judgment.
[¶2] Based on the evidence presented at trial, the court found the following facts. Both parties own property on the westerly side of Main Street in Bar Harbor. Testa's owns several contiguous parcels, including a restaurant and a large parking lot behind the buildings on Main Street, and Jack and Sherri Coopersmith own two contiguous parcels that abut the Testa's parking lot. The Coopersmiths' parcels comprise retail jewelry businesses and upstairs rental properties with space for parking behind the buildings. The Coopersmiths' southerly parcel (the Coopersmith building) abuts the Testa's ...