The Uniform Route of a Prescriptive Easement
Easements present one of the most common encumbrances affecting title to real property. An easement allows a property owner to use someone else’s land for a specific purpose, such as ingress and egress, parking, utilities, and even temporary construction. My colleague, Andrew M. McKenzie, wrote an excellent blog post here regarding methods for determining whether a property has an easement. This blog post will focus on just one of the types of easements that he identifies in that post: prescriptive easements. More particularly, this blog post will focus on just one of the elements of a prescriptive easement, and a recent case that has analyzed the standards associated with that element.
A claimant seeking to establish a prescriptive easement must meet the following elements:
- Use of the easement area in an open and notorious manner;
- Continuous or uninterrupted use for a period of ten years;
- Use of the easement area over a uniform route;
- Use adverse to the interest of the property owner; and
- Use that occurs with the knowledge of the property owner at a time when the owner could have asserted and enforced his or her property rights.
Washington courts have developed significant case law pertaining to prescriptive easement claims. A recent unpublished opinion from the Division One Court of Appeals, Anna G. Bell v. Candace K. Schupp, et. al, focused on just one of the elements of a prescriptive easement, the standards required to establish a “uniform route.” In this case, the trial court had granted summary judgment on Bell’s motion for summary judgment on her prescriptive easement claim. Schupp appealed this decision, with one sole issue on appeal: Did a genuine issue of material fact exist as to whether Bell’s use of the easement occurred over a uniform route?
Bell had provided evidence, including aerial photographs and surveys, showing that by 1974, a driveway had been constructed on the southeast corner of Bell’s property, and which provided the only means of ingress and egress to and from Bell’s property. As the driveway ran north, however, it encroached eastward onto the Schupp Property. Bell provided evidence that her and her husband had maintained and used the driveway and shoulder for over a decade. Schupp argued, however, that Bell had not satisfied the “uniform route” element because she failed to provide a precise legal description for the property claimed. Her survey contained no metes and bounds description and lacked the precision of a standard legal description.
The Court of Appeals, however, upheld the trial court ruling, and disagreed with Schupp, finding that: (1) no Washington authority required a metes and bounds description for a prescriptive easement; and (2) the precise boundaries of the route were not material for purposes of deciding whether Bell established a prescriptive easement because she could prove a uniform and consistent route over the years. Failing to provide a precise legal description for the easement area did not preclude a victory on summary judgment. Schupp did not dispute that the route claimed remained consistent over time, and the Court of Appeals found that this undisputed fact sufficiently established the uniform use requirement. As an interesting side note, the Court of Appeals also upheld the trial court’s ruling that Bell could establish the metes and bounds description later, which Bell did subsequently supply to the trial court after the ruling on summary judgment. The timing of providing that legal description, however, did not impact her right to relief.
Bell v. Schupp demonstrates just one example of the fact that addressing prescriptive easements and their elements can involve significant nuance. Property owners who believe they may have prescriptive claims should consult with legal counsel to determine the strengths and weaknesses of those claims. The lawyers at Beresford Booth have significant experience addressing a wide variety of real property issues, including those pertaining to easements. Should you need any assistance or guidance with your real estate needs, please do not hesitate to contact us.
To learn more about The Uniform Route of a Prescriptive Easement, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@beresfordlaw.com or by phone (425) 776-4100.