Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Is there a court order to stop a neighbor improving an easement road without

You may be able to get an injunction, however, have the documents reviewed by an attorney to determine all options. Call me directly at (619) 222-3504.

Re: Is there a court order to stop a neighbor improving an easement road without

Yes, assuming that interpretation of the language in the recorded easements means that consultation with each property owner is required before action can be taken. Have an attorney evaluate the language of the easement and rate your chances.

Re: Is there a court order to stop a neighbor improving an easement road without

Determing the various rights and obligations related to an easement is not quite as simple as "majority rule." There is a large body of law that governs the subject of easements.

You should engage counsel to file a complaint for injunctive relief and declaratory relief. As part of that process, the attorney will immediately go to court and request a Temporary Restraining Order. The TRO is designed to maintain the status quo until the court can decide whether to issue a Preliminary Injunction, after briefing by both sides and a hearing. If the court determines that the side asking for the injunctive relief is more likely to prevail at time of trail then not, the court can grant the Preliminary Injunction, which will again preserve the status quo through time of trial. If you prevail at trial, the injunction becomes permanent.

The hearing on the preliminary injunction will normally occur within about 30 days after the hearing on the TRO.

Without knowing what the scope of the easement may be, its hard to give an idea of how this will all play out in court. A court is more likely to issue an order prohibiting some action, rather than an order requiring some affirmative action. Thus, your request should be narrowly tailored to simply preclude them from taking any action to �improve� the easement before the court can rule on the respective rights of the parties. You should contact an experienced real estate counsel who has handled more than just a few lawsuits involving injunctive relief.

Best of luck, and feel free to contact me if you have further questions.

Now the inevitable caveat: The foregoing analysis is offered as an accommodation only, and does not constitute a legal opinion based on comprehensive review of all the facts, documents and law related to the issue. No attorney-client relationship is expressly or impliedly formed by provision of the foregoing information.

Re: Is there a court order to stop a neighbor improving an easement road without

Yes. I would file and serve a lawsuit seeking so-called declaratory relief and at the same time asking for a temporary restraining order (TRO). Unlike the much-simplified process for getting a domestic violence or harassment restraining order, a general civil TRO, which would be followed soon thereafter by a temporary injunction if the judge thinks you might win and a permanent injunction if you do win, must be preceded or accompanied by a lawsuit seeking some kind of relief, damages or other remedy.

A suit for declaratory relief asks the court to delcare the law on a particular matter, in this case whether the easement "improvements" can be made without a prior meet-and-confer, and whether 2-against-1 works or unanimity is required before this project can proceed. Maybe other questions would be addressed to the court as well.

There is a high chance the neighbors would settle with you well before trial, especially if you prevailed both at the TRO stage and the preliminary injunction stages. You should be able (with a good lawyer) to get a TRO within 3-4 days and the preliminary injunction hearing would be within 10-15 days thereafter. If trial were necessary, suits asking for declaratory judgments as the sole or principal remedy are entitled to priority in trial.

What is less clear is your likelihood of prevailing, in whole or in part. There may be more than one issue here. For example, the court might hold that some kinds of repairs and possibly even some minor upgrading can be done unilaterally, or by one easement user on his own land, but that other work requires conferring. The ruling might give you an absolute veto power over certain work, but permit a 2-to-1 vote on other work. Possibly the court would hold that the agreement was completely void. An attorney who knows the law of easements could give you a prediction after reading the agreement and asking a few questions about the circumstances.