Bill Griffin, president of the Longview Hotel Condominium Association, stands in front of the parking space on Monday that was the subject of a lawsuit between neighboring condo buildings in Old Orchard Beach. Longview lost its lawsuit over the space. Brianna Soukup/Staff Photographer

In Old Orchard Beach, two neighboring condominium associations have quarreled for more than 30 years over which building can claim a single parking space.

On one side, the Longview Hotel Condominium Association argues the spot is on its property – it has paved, plowed and paid taxes on the land for decades.

On the other side, the Pearl Inn Condominium Association says its residents are the only ones who’ve parked there. The spot is theirs, by squatter’s rights.

Last month, the state’s highest court quashed the dispute – at least in the eyes of the law – and ruled that the Pearl condo owners have, over the last 30 years, used the parking spot so consistently that it now belongs to them.

The neighboring buildings were built in the 1980s by the same developer. Ruth Morin, the first person to regularly use the parking space, owned a unit in both buildings, according to court documents.

When Roch Rodrigue purchased Morin’s Pearl building unit in 1992, he also took over the parking space. It’s unclear if Morin lived in the Longview building after selling her Pearl building condo. For the next 28 years, Rodrigue let multiple people, all staying in his unit or the building, use the spot. His in-laws, an elderly neighbor and a former tenant all parked in the contested space, on and off – some year-round and others in the summer or winter.

Pearl has eight units, Longview has six. The buildings have separate parking lots.

Over the decades, there were occasional squabbles over the parking space – a heated discussion between residents of the two buildings or a conversation at one of the association’s annual meetings. It was more of an annoyance than a full-blown problem, said Bill Griffin, president of the Longview association.

Neighboring condo buildings, Longview, left, and Pearl, right, in Old Orchard Beach. The Longview Hotel Condominium Association sued the Pearl condo association over a parking spot between the two buildings. Brianna Soukup/Staff Photographer

“Being right on the beach, parking spots are valuable,” he said.

Representatives for the Pearl building’s association declined to speak about the case.

PROPERTY LINE THROUGH STAIRCASE 

In 1997, according to court documents, a Longview unit owner complained about a Pearl resident’s use of the parking space. A survey of the land confirmed that a staircase on the outside of the Pearl building encroaches on the boundary between two properties and the lower half of the staircase was on Longview’s land.

Pearl’s attorney wrote to the Longview unit owner and developer of the building, advising that Pearl believed it had acquired the rights to the entire staircase and the disputed area. Longview did not take legal action to contest Pearl’s position until December 2021, the court said.

Griffin, who has lived in the building for the last eight years, said another resident had a survey completed in 2021 before some renovation work and shared the results with the association.

Griffin said he wrote to the Pearl building’s association, seeking a liability waiver for the stairway and said they also wanted to reclaim the parking spot, which had always been viewed as a “guest spot” for Longview residents.

Within a week, there was a “no parking” sign and Griffin received an email from Pearl’s lawyer, he said.

“I guess we kind of dug our heels in and said, ‘If you’re going to be like that, we’ll see this to the end,’ ” Griffin said.

They believed they were being “neighborly,” allowing the elderly Pearl building resident to use the parking spot, Griffin said.

They didn’t know about squatter’s rights, which are also called adverse possession laws, he said. If they had, they would have acted sooner. 

Longview filed a lawsuit against the Pearl building’s association in York County Superior Court, claiming common law, trespass and nuisance, seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief, as well as a declaratory judgment affirming its right to the property.

The contested parking spot between neighboring condo buildings in Old Orchard on Monday. Brianna Soukup/Staff Photographer

Pearl filed a counterclaim that it had a “prescriptive easement” or had obtained ownership through adverse possession. The two claims are similar. A prescriptive easement is, essentially, a legal right to use another person’s land without permission for a long period of time, while adverse possession is when someone lays claim to something based on using it “continuously” and “notoriously” for at least 20 years. Pearl also added a claim for trespass.

‘A PRINCIPLE THING’

In its counterclaim, the Pearl building association noted that it contributed $280 to have the road paved in 2002.

The two associations went through mediation in early 2022, which failed. 

A judge ultimately sided with the Pearl building, ruling that it had achieved squatter’s rights – or adverse possession. A person can gain adverse possession after 20 years of continuous use.

Longview appealed the decision to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, arguing that the use, which was at times seasonal, was not continuous. 

But the court disagreed, noting that “continuous use does not require a full-time resident to park in the (disputed area) seven days a week, year-round.”

There was “ample” evidence to support that Rodrigue had allowed Pearl residents to park in the spot continuously for well over 20 years, the court said. The official boundaries for the space are still being worked out.

“Conversely, there was scant, if any, evidence that Longview unit owners made any use of the same area during that time. Nor did Longview take any steps to contest Pearl’s usage and claim of right until it filed this action in December 2021, despite having been on notice as early as 1997,” the court wrote in its decision.

Griffin said the association members were disappointed in the outcome but that they’ll move on. The group spent nearly $29,000 in legal fees.

Griffin admitted that many condo associations would not have taken the time and money to argue about a parking spot – one they didn’t often use – all the way to the state supreme court. 

“It was more of a principle thing for us,” he said. “We really did believe that was our land and our spot, and we were upset we paved it and maintained it and paid taxes on it. … We were being neighborly, and then it came back to bite us.”