Owners on beach must give access

Ruling gives rights to some neighbors

A court ruled certain neighbors of Robert and Cynthia Stimson had access rights after having gone to the beach for 20 years. (John tlumacki/File/The Boston Globe)

In a case that may send legal ripples across the South Shore, some Hingham homeowners have won the right to use a crescent-shaped sliver of beach, defeating property owners who erected a locked gate and tried to deny them access.

The three-year legal battle ignited a storm of controversy in the quiet Crow Point section of town, pitting neighbor against neighbor in a battle over who could use the rocky beach, which has spectacular views of the harbor and its islands.

The Dec. 12 ruling by Land Court Judge Alexander H. Sands III was in some ways a split decision. He ruled that the plaintiffs had no deeded rights to the beach. However, those who had used the beach for 20 years or more had established a right-of-way and could continue using it.

The ruling meant that seven families obtained an easement to the beach, while three families did not, including one family that had used the beach for 19 1/2 years. The easement continues with their houses when they are sold.

The ruling opens the way for other neighbors to apply for access, said attorneys.

The fight is similar to others waged in seaside communities, such as Plymouth and Mashpee, where new beachfront property owners have tried to shut out neighbors who, over the decades, had come to take community beach access for granted.

The Hingham neighbors expressed qualified happiness at the ruling. "We didn't hit a home run," said James Kane, a neighbor who was granted access. "We're pleased for ourselves and upset for the others" who didn't get access.

Robert Stimson, one of three defendants who was seen by some neighbors as the primary instigator in blocking access, said, "Everyone won a little bit, and we all lost a lot."

He said he was happy that access to the beach has been limited, but chagrined at the adversity he had stirred in the neighborhood and the bruising his reputation took.

"I'm the big, bad guy, and I'm actually one of the most generous guys you would ever meet," Stimson said.

The Stimsons in 2003 built a $2.5 million, gray-shingled, 5,700-square-foot house with sweeping porches close to the beach. The gate was erected in 2004.

Hingham neighbors said the ensuing fight rattled a tight-knit neighborhood that had enjoyed boating, swimming, and ice cream socials on the beach for generations.

Kathy Arnold said she stopped taking her grandchildren to the beach after one of the defendants yelled at her. That was a far cry from years past, when she and other young mothers drank coffee and socialized on the beach while their children played.

"It was a happy community gathering area," said Arnold, who has lived in her Jarvis Avenue home for 37 years.

Stimson said the judge will be asked to clarify some points, such as the boundaries of the beach or how many guests those with access can bring to the beach.

The fight in the Crow Point neighborhood, a spit of land that embraces Hingham Harbor, had brewed for years before spilling into court.

In 1999, 27 people, under the name of the Crow Point Community Club, sent a letter to the Donahues, who lived beside the walkway, saying they were concerned the Donahues planned "to take over our deeded property" and that the neighbors intended "to use the beach as usual for sunbathing, swimming, and boating."

What brought matters to a head was the 2004 appearance of the white picket fence and gate. The fence, which is about 10 or so feet long, was erected across Melville Walk, the unpaved path that leads to the beach. The gate included a chain and a "No Trespassing" sign.

It was easy to step over the chain or around the fence, but the symbolism was clear. The neighbors sued, held fund-raisers for legal fees, and hired attorney James S. Timmins.

"It's always been a nice quiet, neighborly community," said Kane. "Then all of a sudden someone comes in and builds a big house and says, boom, you're out of here."

The judge, in his 47-page ruling, dived deep into the complicated, murky history of real estate sales dating to the 1800s to determine who had rights to the beach.

The judge noted that neighborhood families for decades had used the beach for swimming, hosting ice cream socials, a float in the 1960s, a picnic table, and beach cleanups.

The judge ordered the removal of the gate.

Matt Carroll can be reached at mcarroll@globe.com.