Councilman v. Le Compte

COLLINS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, as follows: From the record and the plats filed in this case, it is shown that the shore line of the Keester property runs in a general direction parallel to the channel of the Chop-tank River, while the shore line of the property of Councilman, the appellant, runs in a general direction approximately diagonally to the channel of the Choptank River. The Keester property is, therefore, almost directly opposite the middle line of the river while the property of the appellant runs more or less diagonally to the middle line of the Choptank River. As pointed out in the majority opinion, the statute providing for the erection of booby, brush or stake blinds provides in part “* * * he shall not place same within 250 yards of the dividing line of any property owned by him and the adjoining property bordering on said waters (* * *) meaning a line extending out over the waters drawn direct from the dividing line of said properties at the shore line * The statute is silent as to the course in which the line of said properties at the shore line should be extended out over the waters other that it should be run “direct from the dividing line.” Obviously, as stated in the majority opinion, the Legislature did not intend that the division ⁴³⁴ line should be extended out over the waters in the same direction as such division line runs on the land or be a continuation of the dividing line. Sheehy v. Thomas, 155 Md. 688 , 142 A. 506 : If this were the case, the owner of a triangular plot could, by continuing his lines over the water, cut off all rights of his neighbors.

In what direction should the dividing line be extended out over the waters for the purpose of determining whether the blind in question is within two hundred and fifty yards of said dividing line? The two farms are divided by Muddy Creek which empties into the Choptank River and therefore the dividing line between the two farms is Muddy Creek. The surveyor for the appellee placed a stake slightly to the northeast of the mouth of Muddy Creek as his beginning point and nearer the Keester property. If he had placed it at the exact middle of the creek, it would have been closer to the line of appellant’s shore.

It is stipulated and agreed that the Councilman blind is eighty-five yards from the line A-B drawn from the stake A slightly to the northeast of the mouth of Muddy Creek approximately at right angles to the middle line of the Choptank' River. If this line A-B is the correct dividing line out over the waters, then the Councilman blind is one hundred and sixty-five yards nearer to the dividing line than the statute allows. As pointed out by the chancellor below, the object of the statute is to give a just and equitable apportionment of the water frontage to riparian owners and such riparian owners are limited under the statute to the waters directly in front of their respective properties and the blind must be 250 yards from the dividing line. In cases where the shore lines are straight and run parallel to the line of the channel and the middle of the river, the statute is not hard to interpret, but as in the instant case where the shore