Grant an easement or not?

johnw · #21 05/06/06, 04:02 PM

In Tennessee a person can give a "license" to a person for a particular use... this can be ingress/ egress.. fishing in a pond or farming rights.... it is basically a contract between two parties... and is not an easement. An easement is part of the land. a liscence would be between two parties and would be voidable.... As always this could be easily done with a one hour session with a lawyer.

donsgal · #22 05/06/06, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kickapoo

We've been asked for an easement across a corner of our property by a potential buyer of the difficult-to-access property next door. Should we do it? If we granted an easement to our friends could we later deny it to the next owner if they decided to move? Would they potentially have a problem if we moved?

[Note: edited from the original for easier reading]

If there is no other way for these people to access their land, they could be awareded an "easement of necessity" (in Missouri), by the court. How have they been getting to their land?

donsgal

donsgal · #23 05/06/06, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveD(TX)

The correct term is "prescriptive easement". This a type of "adverse possession" and is an unrecorded easement until a court awards it in a lawsuit. Take heed to what Dave says when buying land and be careful of any apparent roads, trails, driveways, etc. that might be someone's access they've been using for a while. Each state is different; in Texas the period of time required is 10 years.

That may be how it is in Texas, I am not arguing with you, however, in Missouri, there is a difference. If one family used the property for ingress and egress for 100 years, it would not be adverse possession or prescriptive easement. The rightful owner could still throw up a fence and forbid them to enter (provided that it is not the ONLY way for them to get into the property). HOWEVER, if every Tom, Dick and Harry used it for 100 years to get down to the "fishin' hole" and nobody ever objected, then it would be very difficult for the rightful owner to stop people from using it. The difference being a few versus many people considering it an easement.

Also, in Missouri for adverse possession it must be continuous and notorious use for 7 continuous years. And the people who want the easment must take it to court and have it put on their deed by a judge (expensive!). They must prove that everybody (including the rightful owner), knew that they were using the land and never objected. This is virtually impossible to do, since it is their word against the owner's word. In 99 percent of the cases, I would guess that owner rights will be upheld over squatter's rights.

But I would still NOT give them an easment and make it known that you do not want them crossing your land. Make sure other people know this so if you have to you can call them as witnesses. Even better, send them a letter (keeping a copy for yourself), so you can prove that you notified them that you did not want them there.

donsgal