Riparian easement to access a dock; Ownership; Theis v Howland; Breach of contract claim based on a bylaws breach; Ottawa Shores Homeowners Association (OSHA)

The court held that defendant-OSHA owned “the waterbed adjacent to Outlot D on which the dock” at issue was built, that plaintiffs did not have a riparian easement over Outlot D, and that the trial court did not prematurely dismiss their claim for breach of OSHA’s bylaws. The subject of the appeal was “a dock for mooring boats located in the waterbed adjacent to ‘Outlot D,’ a riparian lot located in the Ottawa Shores Subdivision[.]” Plaintiffs owned two lots in the Subdivision and used Outlot D. They claimed they possessed a riparian easement within the Subdivision and owned the dock. The court concluded that under Theis, “and by virtue of its ownership of Outlot D, OSHA owns the waterbed adjacent to Outlot D on which the dock was built to the middle of the Ottawa River.” It also held that because the pleadings established “OSHA owned Outlot D, the adjacent waterbed, and the dock in question, and that plaintiffs did not have a riparian easement to use Outlot D, plaintiffs complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.” Finally, the court found that “without citing to specific bylaws that have been breached, and without alleging specific facts about how OSHA was being mismanaged or improperly run, or any further details about its most recent Board elections, plaintiffs” did not plead how the “bylaws were breached with sufficient specificity to survive summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(8).” Thus, these “claims were properly dismissed.”