White’s Ferry river crossing in Montgomery Co. (MD) ceases operations after court decision

Taken out of town guests over the ferry several times to explore small town Virginia and the Leesburg outlet mall.

I loved that ferry.

First they came for the ?????? and since I wasn’t a ?????? I ‘didn’t care’. etc etc etc

Drip Drip Drip, the erosion of our history is in full swing.

Wait till they start tearing down War Memorials and Veterans Parks honoring those that fought in the Wars of the US.

Can see ‘people’ complaining of others wearing WWI, WWII, Korea or Vietnam hats/flags because we are ‘upsetting’ the Asians (Used to be Orientals but can no longer ‘use’ and don’t dare say there is a ‘Nip’ in the air) or others we may have slowed down in their quest for World Domination.

Khrushchev had the right idea about ‘defeating’ us from within, without raising a weapon -

well explained. Have been across that ferry several times years ago, last century, and once more recently as a destination. I certainly hope that some smart people can resolve this.

I don’t even know what to say.

No. I did my quarry swimming back in Indiana, where we have world class holes in the ground in the limestone belt.

"The problem is that the 1871 Order did not provide a map or, apparently, even a clear description of what was condemned. There was therefore nothing that could be used as a basis for a survey. The judge concluded, correctly in my view, that unless there was something that clearly defined the area condemned the defendant couldn't satisfy its burden to prove the location being used by the ferry company was permitted by the Order."

The important point is that some public right-of-way was taken in 1871. Unless Virginia law is drastically different from other jurisdictions, public property isn't lost to adverse possession like private property. That right-of-way still exists somewhere on the VA side of the river. The ferry company could sue a bunch of property owners for a declaratory judgment for a determination of where it is. Presumably it isn't far from the road. It seems to me that the ferry company just got arrogant and thought it could force a solution through the courts. The matter could still be appealed, but if there was a contract, that is an admission that the land wasn't public. However, the VA county could decide to just condemn the land to keep the ferry operating. That happens.

Sounds like “Breaking Away”.

The important point is that some public right-of-way was taken in 1871.

That's important, but not dispositive. As a defense to a claim of trespass the company had to prove the precise location of the ROW. Because the 1871 order wasn't specific as to location, the judge concluded that the company was unable to prove that the ROW was in the precise location it was using. Accordingly, the claim of trespass prevailed. I don't know how a judge in a declaratory judgment action could order a ROW to be located in a certain location when the very order granting the ROW didn't precisely describe the location. A judge can't just make it up.

It seems to me that the ferry company just got arrogant and thought it could force a solution through the courts.

The landowner was the plaintiff in the case and sued in order to get control of its land. The company was arrogant in thinking it could continue to use the landowner's property in perpetuity without paying rent for it. The company also didn't do itself any favors by building a retaining wall without the landowner's consent in direct violation of the licensing agreement.

However, the VA county could decide to just condemn the land to keep the ferry operating.

Perhaps. Of course, the county would have to pay the landowner. The landowner would also have a good argument that the county can't use its power of eminent domain to protect the interests of a private company, namely the ferry company.

That's important, but not dispositive. As a defense to a claim of trespass the company had to prove the precise location of the ROW. Because the 1871 order wasn't specific as to location, the judge concluded that the company was unable to prove that the ROW was in the precise location it was using. Accordingly, the claim of trespass prevailed. I don't know how a judge in a declaratory judgment action could order a ROW to be located in a certain location when the very order granting the ROW didn't precisely describe the location. A judge can't just make it up.

Old deeds were far less precise than modern practice about such things, and relied on "public knowledge" and witnesses now long gone. I would make an unjust enrichment argument against someone regarding the lost public right-of-way to the river. The private agreement is proof that the present location of the landing wasn't on public property, but there is an equitable argument to be made if it can be proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the public access to the river was on the plaintiff's land. (It would get tricky if the land has been subdivided after 1871.) When was the public road recognized/extended? It ends near the ferry landing. Looking at the map, the buildings on the other side are further down stream. That suggests to me that the original ferry landing was there. This will likely be appealed.

Perhaps. Of course, the county would have to pay the landowner. The landowner would also have a good argument that the county can't use its power of eminent domain to protect the interests of a private company, namely the ferry company.

The rejoinder would be that the land provides public access to the water for fishing, recreation, etc. and benefits more than just the ferry, which would be argued is a public utility. They could also claim that the land is being condemned to build a bridge, which could force a settlement.

I’m curious to know whether you are a lawyer.

I’m curious to know whether you are a lawyer.

I don't like to give out too much information online. I have noted that I have a law degree and was a classmate of a federal judge. This case went to court in large part because the owner of the right-of-way, likely the county, was negligent and permitted it to become "lost" to the point that no one can find it to use it. It's still there somewhere, and the county has the power to reclaim it, and the public's access to the water.