Absent knowing the local laws, I agree with you, and the pictures of the fence don't show it being so high as to unreasonably shade the neighbor's lot. Yet I'd hope a Judge could condemn the lake, at a reasonable non-extortion comdemnation price price, so as to maintain the neighborhood peace.And I'd hope that property rights are worth more than "peace". So would a lot of Korean grocers in shall-we-say "economically disadvantaged neighborhoods". Taking their stores or controlling their prices could be called "maintaining the peace" by unscrupulous politicians.
I'd bet that $30,000 is the approximate difference in property values between houses with legitimate lake frontage, and those without.
-Eric
Precisely!
The homeowners never purchased the lake. They have been enjoying a windfall. The Speculator purchased the property for $1,000. He now enjoys a windfall. This case is nothing more than which party gets to enjoy the windfall. Since the homeowners paid nothing and never obtained title while the speculator did, the law will be on his side.
Here we have a neighborhood, built around a lake, centered around the lake, landscaped to the lake, with the people having bought the lots in a planned subdivision where the lake was part of the plan. Now those folks have an ugly, naught but view-blocking fence in their backyards, built by a man who built the fence just for the sake of having them pay to take it down.
You might have a fine Jewelery store downtown someday. And maybe then some stinking ragged grifter will come to sleep near your entryway and p&ss against it. And the grifter wants $1,000 to move away. Would ask the city to pass a law against such, or will you advocate the right of freemen to stink, sleep and p&ss where they may?