
USCA1 Opinion

	














                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________


        No. 97-1679


                                FRED GIOVINO, ET AL.,

                                Plaintiffs, Appellees,

                                          v.

                                  GEOFFREY D. WYLER,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________


                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                     [Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                           Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Geoffrey D. Wyler on brief pro se.
            _________________
            Edmond J. Bearor,  John W. McCarthy and Rudman & Winchell on brief
            ________________   ________________     _________________
        for appellees.


                                 ____________________

                                   February 5, 1998
                                 ____________________



















                 Per  Curiam.  We  have carefully reviewed  the record in
                 ___________

            this  case,  including the  briefs  of  the parties  and  the

            findings  of  fact and  conclusions  of law  of  the district

            court.  We affirm.

                 We find  no error  in the  district court  determination

            that  the  1986  deed  conveying  land  from  IP  Timberlands

            Operating Company,  Ltd. [IPTO]  to International  Paper [IP]

            reserved to IPTO a right  to travel over the so-called "outer

            road."  Similarly, the court  did not err in determining that

            the deeds  of the other  plaintiffs also endowed them  with a

            right to travel over this road.  

                 Me. Rev. Stat. Ann.  tit. 33,    201-A has no effect  on

            this issues  in this  case.  By  its plain  language, section

            201-A  pertains neither to the creation  or the extinction of

            an  easement but only to  whether an unrecorded deed provides

            "actual  notice"  of an  easement  to  subsequent purchasers.

            Since the  1986 deed between  IPTO and IP was  duly recorded,

            pursuant to  Me. Rev.  Stat. Ann.  tit. 33,    201, the  deed

            itself gave constructive notice of the easement to subsequent

            purchasers like  Wyler.   See Westman  v. Armitage,  215 A.2d
                                      ___ _______     ________

            919, 922 (Me. 1966) (recordation is "constructive notice .  .

            to after purchasers under the same grantor") (citing cases).

                 Finally, the district  court did not commit  clear error

            in  finding  that  IPTO's  improvements  to  the  outer  road

            constituted reasonable maintenance.



                                         -2-















                 Affirmed.
                 ________



















































                                         -3-







