Implied Easement of Access
"In general the same principles that govern the effect to be given a plan in the case of unregistered land apply where the land is registered." Goldstein v. Beal 317 Mass. 750, 59 N.E.2d 712 (1945). In Goldstein property was shown on a plan and access would have been implied if the property had been unregistered land, based on the rule that provides that an easement arises when a commonly-owned parcel is severed. The question was whether the rule would apply to registered land where the certificate made no mention of the appurtenant right. The court held that it would.
There are many other cases that hold that the general rules applicable to unregistered land apply also to registered land. See Federal National Bank v. Gaston, 56 Mass. 471, 152 N.E. 924 (1926), Feldman v. Souza, 27 Mass.App.Ct. 1142, 538 N.E.2d 64 (1989), Killam v. March, 316 Mass. 646, 55 N.E.2d 945 (1944) and Wild v. Constantini, 415 Mass. 663, 615 N.E.2d 558 (1993), just to name a few.