Vague language in easements is one of the most common sources of property disputes. When the wording is unclear, owners, neighbors, and even tenants can find themselves fighting over basic questions and creating enforcement issues over time.

What is an easement?

An easement is a legal right to use someone else’s land for a specific, limited purpose, such as access, parking, or utilities, without owning that land. The land burdened by the easement is called the “servient estate,” and the land or party that benefits is the “dominant estate.”

How can ambiguous language impact property?

The language and interpretation of easements are governed under contract law. Therefore, courts look heavily at both what was said and what was not said in interpreting the scope of the easement and establishing what is and is not a violation of the easement. Depending on the type of easement, the language of an easement is binding on all future owners of both the dominant and servient estate. Therefore, while the drafters of the easement may understand the objectives, ambiguous easements can become problematic as properties change hands, especially if the property use evolves.

A classic example can be found in Lease v. Doll, 403 A.2d 558 (Pa. 1979). In Lease, the Leases acquired a landlocked property accessed via an easement over an adjoining tract of appellee landowners, the Dolls. The language of the easement contained no information as to the width of the easement or the intended method of travel. Historically, the right of way had been used primarily as a footpath. The original owner of the dominant estate did not own an automobile, and the ground adjacent to the stream was soft and damp, sometimes impassable by vehicle.

When the Leases moved in, they attempted to widen and improve the easement for vehicular access, including dumping stone in order to make the ground more suitable to handle the weight of an automobile. The Dolls objected, prevented the improvements from continuing and constructed a fence to limit the right of way to a footpath. The trial court limited the easement to a footpath due to the historical use. The appellate court disagreed and found that denying vehicular use would render the Leases’ land practically useless. Therefore, the Court remanded the case with an opinion that the easement could be used for reasonable vehicular access.

The result of this ambiguity is that the easement’s footprint on the Doll’s property grew resulting in a more significant amount of the Doll’s property being used for the Lease’s benefit.

This fact pattern can be applied to any number of understandable examples. A vague easement simply allowing two businesses to share parking could become problematic if, over time, the dominant estate business explodes in popularity and its customers take over the majority of the parking lot. Further, even if the parties were to agree to a proportional use the parking lot, would heavy trucks or construction vehicles be allowed? What if the party responsible for maintenance of the parking lot is not the party using the heavy trucks and construction vehicles?

How can you avoid easement problems?

If you and a neighbor are thinking of entering into an easement agreement, the easiest way to avoid issues is to have an easement drafted by competent legal counsel. If your neighbor has hired an attorney, you should be sure to retain your own counsel to look out for your interests. Naturally, it is impossible to foresee every permutation of use when drafting an easement. However, a competent attorney will be able to assist you in identifying foreseeable areas of concern. Further, depending on the type of easement, they can recommend different kinds of easements and different ways to structure the easement, such as a time-limited easement, in order to minimize disputes in the future.

If you have purchased a dominant or servient estate, the next best option is to review the easement with an attorney and explore with the other owner whether an amendment or written clarification between the affected owners is worth exploring. As set forth in Lease v. Doll, just because an easement has worked in the past does not mean it will work in the future. As industries evolve and technology changes, how individuals and companies interact with the world around them and the real estate they own will continue to change. Sometimes a writing simply confirming how the easement has been used in practice can be invaluable if a dispute arises.