Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
Easement questions
Several years ago, we purchased property in a gated community. There was an easement through our parcel which allowed access to adjacent private lands outside of the subdivision. There was no access to the private lands from a public road. We built a home on a portion of the land which doesn't require us to use the easement road. Access to our home is via another road.
The county allowed the private landowners to build a tempoary road to access the private lands for tree harvest. This temporay road allowed for access to a public road outside of the community. The temporary road connected the easement road on our land to the public road. The temporary road passed thought a lot owned by one of the land holders of the private land and then connected to the easement road through our land. The road required improvement, to allow access by large equipment for the harvest. No one, at the time, asked us to pay for any of the improvements. A portion of the private land was eventually sold and the new owner convinced the county to create a permanent access through the lot to the easement road.
Recently, a tree fell across the easement road on our property and the new land owner requested that we pay for removal.
Are we liable?
1 Answer from Attorneys
Re: Easement questions
Without mapping out the entire situation, it's pretty hard to answer this question; however, my offhand guess is that the answer can be found by applying two basic rules of easement law:
1. Maintenance of an easement is usually apportioned to the easement users (including the owner of the servient estate) in proportion to use; anyone who doesn't use the easement probably wouldn't be expected to contribute to maintenance, absent an express agreement to the contrary; and
2. The owner of the servient estate (i.e., the property across which the easement lies) must not do anything that unduly interferes with the use of the easement.
Therefore, if the tree was growing on your property, you might be required to remove it, since it would be classed as an interference with use of the easement. On the other hand, in a wild and natural forest setting, it is also arguable that removal of fallen trees is just a routine part of maintenance. This could go either way in a jury trial situation.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
