Choquette v. Roy
Annotate this CasePetitioners Raymond and Pamela Choquette filed separate petitions against respondents Phillippe Roy (P.E. Roy), individually and as trustee of the Roy Family Trust, Jason Roy and Thomas and Kelly Robichaud. Consolidated case related to the transfer of, use o and access to certain parcels of land originally owned by petitioners and currently owned by respondents. Petitioners appealed, and respondents cross-appealed the superior court's order resolving the dispute. Because the trial court found that P.E. Roy had no right to maintain a road that access the parcels in question, the court did not reach the issue of whether P.E. Roy's specific acts of maintenance interfered with the rights of petitioners or other users of the easement. The Supreme Court, therefore, held only that the trial court erred in ruling that P.E. Roy did not have the right and duty to maintain the easement over "Sugar Shack" Right of Way. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court's ruling on this issue and remanded for further proceedings as the trial court might deem warranted, including, if necessary, determination of whether P.E. Roy's actions interfered with the rights of the petitioners or other users of the easement. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court in all other respects.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.