A recent California appellate decision serves as a reminder to attorneys, property owners, and title professionals: an easement claim cannot be upheld on fundamentally inconsistent legal grounds.
At Liberty Land Abstract, where our team supports attorneys and their clients through complex transactions and title issues, we closely monitor legal trends like these to help ensure clear, insurable ownership rights and prevent title defects down the line.
The Case: Batta v. Hunt
In Batta v. Hunt, California’s Second Appellate District reversed a trial court decision that had granted an easement based on three conflicting theories:
-
Easement by Express Oral Grant
-
Easement by Implication
-
Prescriptive Easement
The trial involved neighboring apartment buildings in Los Angeles. Since 1994, tenants of one property had used part of the adjacent property for parking and waste disposal. In 2019, when the original owner refused to sign a covenant confirming parking rights, litigation ensued.
The trial court granted an easement in favor of the plaintiffs under all three theories—an outcome that the appellate court found internally inconsistent and legally untenable.
Why the Reversal Matters
Here’s the critical legal takeaway:
An easement granted by consent (express or implied) cannot coexist with an easement established through hostile, adverse use.
That is, easement by implication or oral grant presumes permission, while prescriptive easement requires use without permission. The appellate court determined that these findings could not be reconciled and therefore reversed the trial court’s judgment.
Practical Guidance for Attorneys
This decision underscores important principles for real estate counsel:
-
Consistency of Theory Matters: When seeking to establish an easement, be mindful that courts require alignment between the facts and the legal theory relied upon.
-
Plead in the Alternative — But Elect Wisely: While it’s acceptable to plead alternative theories, a plaintiff (or the court) must ultimately select one legally consistent theory on which to base a judgment.
-
Beware Late-Stage Amendments: The court criticized the trial court for allowing an in-trial amendment without affording the defendant time for discovery, a procedural misstep with consequences.
🧾 Relevance to Title
From a title perspective, easements — especially those rooted in implication or prescription — can present challenges for insurability, risk assessment, and boundary analysis. Liberty Land Abstract works with attorneys and clients to resolve such issues proactively and ensure that easements are properly recorded, understood, and insurable.
When reviewing a title or preparing for closing, always verify that any claimed easements are legally sound, recorded when appropriate, and do not conflict with one another.
💼 Liberty Land Abstract is proud to serve as a resource to the legal community in navigating easement claims, encroachments, and other real property complexities.