Easement by Prescription
What is the Easement by Prescription?
An easement acquired through continuous, open, hostile, and adverse use of another's land for the statutory period, analogous to adverse possession but granting a right of use rather than ownership.
Source: Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, Inc., 35 Cal. 3d 564 (1984)
Definition
An easement by prescription is a non-possessory interest in land acquired through long-continued use that satisfies requirements analogous to those for adverse possession. Like adverse possession, the use must be open and notorious, adverse and hostile (without the owner's permission), and continuous and uninterrupted for the applicable statutory period. However, unlike adverse possession, prescriptive use does not result in ownership of the land but rather grants a right to use the land for a specific purpose.
A critical distinction from adverse possession is that prescriptive use need not be exclusive. Multiple users can independently acquire prescriptive easements over the same property, and a prescriptive easement can be acquired even though the owner and others also use the same path or area. This reflects the nature of an easement as a limited use right rather than an ownership claim.
Prescriptive easements most commonly arise in the context of road and pathway access, where neighbors or members of the public use a path across another's property for an extended period. The scope of a prescriptive easement is limited to the nature and extent of the historical use that gave rise to it. Expansion beyond the historical use is not permitted. Some jurisdictions recognize public prescriptive easements, though this remains controversial. Permission from the landowner defeats a prescriptive easement claim because it negates the hostility element; landowners sometimes post signs or grant written licenses to interrupt prescriptive use.
Key Elements
- 1Open and notorious use of another's property
- 2Adverse and hostile use (without the owner's permission)
- 3Continuous and uninterrupted use for the statutory period
- 4Use need not be exclusive (unlike adverse possession)
- 5Scope of the easement is limited to the nature and extent of the prescriptive use
Landmark Cases
Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, Inc.
35 Cal. 3d 564 (1984)
Clarified the elements of prescriptive easement and addressed the distinction between permissive and adverse use in the prescriptive easement context.
Othen v. Rosier
148 Tex. 485 (1950)
Held that a claimant failed to establish a prescriptive easement because the use was not shown to be adverse rather than permissive.
Community Feed Store, Inc. v. Northeastern Culvert Corp.
151 Vt. 152 (1989)
Applied the prescriptive easement doctrine and addressed the scope of the easement as limited to the historical pattern of use.
Exam Tips
- Compare the elements to adverse possession but remember that exclusivity is NOT required for prescriptive easements.
- Permission defeats prescription. Watch for facts indicating the owner granted a license or allowed the use as a neighborly accommodation -- that negates hostility.
- The scope of the prescriptive easement is frozen to the type and extent of use during the prescriptive period. A path easement cannot be expanded into a road easement.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Requiring exclusivity for a prescriptive easement -- unlike adverse possession, the claimant need not exclude others from using the property.
- Failing to distinguish between prescriptive easement (right to USE) and adverse possession (ownership) -- they have similar elements but very different outcomes.
Memory Aid
Prescription = prolonged use without permission. Same as adverse possession minus exclusivity, and you get USE not TITLE.