Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Accessing Landlocked land

Your crazy neighbor is . . . well, crazy. I will bet that he is also wealthy and litigious, which means that you will need an attorney to help you with this mess.

If your land is truly landlocked, so that ingress/egress can only be obtained via traversing another's land, then you have what is known as an implied easement (aka easement by implication) or an easement by necessity. Whether one or both theories apply will depend upon the facts; and the determination is quite technical; but upon a review of all the facts, I suspect that you will be entitled to traverse over your neighbor's property to get to yours.

The next issue is what is the scope of that easement? After all, you cannot necessarily build a four lane highway over your neighbor's land. Nor can he preclude you from traveling at all. The question for the court is what is a reasonable scope. A variety of factors will go into this calculation.

Get yourself a good real property litigator familiar with title and boundary disputes. We are litigators with extensive experience in such things, and if you need help or a referral, please feel free to call or email.

Good luck.

***No Legal Services or Attorney Client Relationship - Although this email may provide information concerning potential legal issues, it is not a substitute for legal advice from qualified counsel. You should not and are not authorized to rely on this email as a source of legal advice. Until a formal Retainer Agreement is executed, any communication between you and The Guerrini Law Firm cannot create any attorney-client relationship between you and The Guerrini Law Firm.***

Re: Accessing Landlocked land

To be honest, there are indeed landlocked parcels that aren't entitled to easement access by any theory, including so-called 'easement by necessity.' Fortunately, courts abhor such situations, and will usually bend over backwards to assist the holder of a parcel with questioned or doubtful access.

In your case, analysis begins with a review of the subdivision and title history of your parcel and those lying between it and the public roads.

I'm going to review a couple of recent cases on WestLaw and if I find anything very relevant to your facts, I'll post a summplemental answer.

Your ZIP Code shows Rio Linda; is the landlocked parcel also in Sacramento County, or possibly Placer? I have real-property clients and cases all over central and northern California and can represent you effectively.

Re: Accessing Landlocked land

To continue my previous answer, I've looked at the leading cases on easements by necessity, as well as treatises on the subject.

The authorities confirm that not every owner of a landlocked parcel will be found entitled to an easement by necessity (or implied easement or an easement by any other theory or name). It is not sufficient merely to show that an easement is "necessary" in order to reach your parcel.

The additional factors are somewhat more complex than the following suggests, but basically you will be found to have an easement by necessity if all of the following are true:

(1) There is no other way to get onto your parcel, no matter how steep and difficult;

(2) At one time, there was common ownership of the parcel to be benefitted by and the parcel to be burdened by the easement;

(3) severance of the parcels; and

(4) At that time, the common owner used the burdened part of his land for the benefitted part, e.g., there was an access road.

IF there is no prior use (element #4, above), the easement by necessity can still be found if it is clear from the facts surrounding the severance of the parcels that the easement was necessary at that time (as well as at present).

Your situation presents the unusual additional fact of a post-severance encirclement by another owner. I would say that the acquisition of the encircling parcel(s) by the hostile owner does not terminate your easement right, if it ever existed.

As to whether it existed, and still exists, that will depend upon investigating the history of subdivision and severance, historical evidence of use, old surveys and maps, and the like. It sounds difficult, but it may be obvious at an early stage whether you have a high chance of winning or a high chance of losing.

Right now, my hunch is that you have a pretty good chance of winning, but if anyone (lawyer or not) intimates that it's a slam dunk, just because you're landlocked, they don't know what they're talking about.