1. Lessons Learned Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the speaker and not the opinions of the WA State Attorney General’s Office or the Attorney General

5. 2001plan with frontage road approved 2001temporary bridge installed 2004revised plan without frontage road approved 2006construction starts 2007construction completed 2007temporary bridge removed 2007 litigation starts 2015 litigation completed

6. circa 1882 circa 1892

10. (1)taking or damaging (2)of private property (3)for public use (4)without just compensation paid (5)by a governmental entity that has not instituted formal proceedings

11. Right of Reasonable Highway Access: owners of property abutting a state highway RCW 47.50 Highway Management Act non-abutters with “legal” easement to a state highway WAC 468-51-030

12. Grandfathered access under the Highway Access Mgmt. Act Easement by: prescriptive easement implied easement easement by necessity vacated county road Abutter by reversion following railroad abandonment Union Elevator – right to reasonable, adequate, and commercially practicable access under unique facts

13. failure to exhaust administrative remedies not an abutter no railroad abandonment preemption under the Trails Act dismissed quiet title actions against railroad and county no easement no evidence that use was other than permissive no common grantor former road vacated, no private easement retained subsequent purchaser doctrine landlocked through actions of 1935 predecessor in interest

14. sufficiency of search for records owner’s oral assertions require substantiation statements by WSDOT has “farm access” has “informal access”

15. objective observation “fell out of bed” v. “patient found on floor”

16. landlocked property private way of necessity (“private condemnation” – RCW 8.24) Granite Beach Holdings, LLC v. Dep’t of Natural Res., 103 Wn. App. 186, 11 P.3d 847 (2000) Williams Place, LLC v. State, 187 Wn. App. 67, 348 P.3d 797(2015) review denied (Sep. 30, 2015) Gamboa v. Clark, 183 Wn. 2d 38, 348 P.3d 1214 (2015) permissive use v. prescriptive use ending permissive use