More litigation in Clark Fork road dispute

SANDPOINT - Another legal front is opening in an ongoing access dispute northwest of Clark Fork.

Two couples filed suit Tuesday against their neighbors to prevent them from blocking access to Stoney Brooke and Cherry lanes, court records show.

The suit, filed by Matthew and Elizabeth Deen and David and M. June Walker, alleges that Arthur and Betty Rosholt are unlawfully interfering with a valid easement by installing a locked gate at the intersection of Stoney Brook and Cherry lanes.

Counsel for the Deens and Walkers is seeking a judicial declaration ordering the Rosholts to remove the gate and thwart them from blocking the intersection. The action also seeks attorneys fees.

In June, the Deens filed suit against Bonner County over plans to extend East Spring Creek Road through the middle of their property. The road extension was proposed after another Stoney Brooke Lane landowner put neighbors on notice that the route is private and not allowed for public use.

The county contends a public right of way has extended across the Deens' property since 1903, but the Deens counter that representation is not reflected in a title report for their property.

The access dispute emerged earlier this year, when David Walker sought permit approval to expand a family retreat in the Spring Creek Valley. The permit was ultimately denied but the access dispute persisted and intensified.

The county contends that Stoney Brook Lane was improperly listed as legal access to the Liberty Heights subdivision, which was developed by Walker. The improper designation had the potential to deprive Liberty Heights of access, prompting the county to develop the East Spring Creek extension.

In the latest suit, the Deens and Walkers' attorney, Mischelle Fulgham, contends her clients have an express easement across the Rosholt's property as part of their real property rights.

Fulgham said the Rosholts erected the gate despite the easement.

"Defendants Arthur Rosholt and Betty Rosholt installed the lock and gate to thwart the use of Stoney Brooke Lane and Cherry Lane by the plaintiffs, their guests, invitees and family," Fulgham wrote.