California Court of Appeal

In this case, the respondents allege their right to an easement across appellant’s property on several theories, including an easement by prescription. The trial court found that respondents had satisfied their burden of proving the continuous, open, and notorious use of appellant’s property for the five-year prescriptive period, and granted a permanent injunction against appellant from interfering with the easement. The judgment is affirmed, where: 1) there is sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s finding that respondents used the road openly, notoriously, and continuously for a period of five years; and 2) Civil Code section 1009 is inapplicable to the facts of this case because respondents claim a private prescriptive easement for the purpose of accessing their own property.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/05/2015
• Published 03/05/2015

Judges

• Blease

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel