Opinion
Argued May 28, 1999
September 20, 1999
In an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15, inter alia, to declare the parties' rights to a dock located on an easement situated on the plaintiffs' property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Emerson, J.), dated June 4, 1998, which denied their motion for summary judgment, granted the defendants' cross motion for summary judgment, and declared that the defendants were entitled, inter alia, to the use of the subject dock.
Esseks, Hefter Angel, Riverhead, N.Y. (Stephen R. Angel and Anthony C. Pasca of counsel), for appellants.
Bennett Read, Southampton, N.Y. (John J. Bennett of counsel), for respondents.
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly found, as a matter of law, that the subject dock, located at the end of an easement leading to a waterway, was a reasonable and incidental use of the easement. Under the circumstances of this case, the creation of the easement would have been without purpose if not for the dock giving access to the waterway ( see, Briggs v. Di Donna, 176 A.D.2d 1105; Joss v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 41 A.D.2d 596).
SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, FLORIO, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.