Easement Dispute

[gsgrl2000]

Yes, the family member who lives in the front lives there and no they have a seperate entrance to their property and no we are not "flaming the fire" - the sheriff knows my dad cut the lock so we could access the easement when we were there (my family member does not know we are the one's who cut the lock but I'm sure she might suspect it was us) and we know they are going to put another lock on the gate we need to find out other issues regarding the easement while we were there with the sheriff that we found out. Chill everyone 1.we are aware it is a civil matter 2. this is a family dispute 3. there are other circumstances going on not pertaining to the easement 3. thank you everyone for your advice, the matter is getting resolved

 

[gsgrl2000]

...and 4. this is a tresspass issue

 

[HRZ]

Its not trespassing to use ones own easement ?

 

[gsgrl2000]

They are trespassing against us for blocking us of our own easement, so yes this is a trespassing issue; the easement belongs to us not them!t they are the subservient in the case, we are the dominant and they are blocking us

 

[HRZ]

no, unless this is an exclusive easement which is very unlikely if both must use that gateway, then the servient tenant also has right to use it....what they don't have is a right to block or inhibit your in and outs
....there might be some security rationale to a lock but they need you give you a key or code

You may deliberately want to fan the fires w/o doing anything illegal?

 

[HRZ]

Sorry I missed the detail that front house does not need that access way .

 

[not2cleverRed]

no, unless this is an exclusive easement which is very unlikely if both must use that gateway, then the servient tenant also has right to use it....what they don't have is a right to block or inhibit your in and outs
....there might be some security rationale to a lock but they need you give you a key or code

You may deliberately want to fan the fires w/o doing anything illegal?

If it were merely a security issue, a key would have been provided to all owners entitled to access to the easement. It seems rather clear, as OP and OP's father deduced, that the purpose of the lock is to block their use of the easement.

OP is also aware that the other party wants to continue to block access to the easement.

It is unclear why the other party is being such a blockhead. Unfortunately, such blockheads are sometimes incapable to accepting that their actions are wrong, and get unduly angry at those they have transgressed against pointing out their transgressions.

"Fanning the flames" means making the situation worse, by heating up the emotions. The blockheads are going to be irritated by any attempts by OP or OP's father to facilitate and exercise their rights of access to the easement, so I am glad that OP realizes and accepts that a court order is necessary. A court order may piss off the blockheads, but they're less likely to shoot at you claiming you're trespassing. Or at least if they do, there's a legal trail showing that they should know better.

 

[HRZ]

I don't know how inconvenient the blocked easement is or your practical options until the legal dust clears...but consider suing the blocker for all your reasonable added costs associated with the blockage ...

 

[HRZ]

The family dispute is moot , the right of free passage over the easement runs with the land irrespective of who owns it.

 

[gsgrl2000]

Exactly, we have been explaining this point to them "the easement runs with the land irrespective of who owns it" however they are not comprehending this fact, they think they are the "lanlord" and have a right to deny access to who they want to. The only way at this point for them to comprehend this easement issue is if they hear it from a judge.

 

[HRZ]

They will hear it even better if you seek and the judge awards you a stack of fees and costs appropriate to the added costs you actually incurred while access was denied.

Not for your aggregation and frustration but actual added costs.

Actually they are a bit like landlords . they own the land but you hold a forever lease on it that was prepaid earlier . and its most likely your duty to keep the roadway repaired .

 

[not2cleverRed]

They will hear it even better if you seek and the judge awards you a stack of fees and costs appropriate to the added costs you actually incurred while access was denied.

Not for your aggregation and frustration but actual added costs.

Actually they are a bit like landlords . they own the land but you hold a forever lease on it that was prepaid earlier . and its most likely your duty to keep the roadway repaired .

Like, legal fees would be nice.

BTW, what state is this?