Jacob v. Bate
2015 UT App 206
Utah Ct. App.2015Background
- William and JaNeane Jacob (Appellants) own a commercial building and an adjacent 10'x130' alley (the Alleyway) abutting the Bate property; Helen and Robert Bate and tenant Brad Taysom (Appellees) used the Alleyway for business deliveries and building maintenance for decades.
- Title history: county acquired the Alleyway in 1935; Jacobs’ predecessor obtained the parcel circa 1939–1940; earlier conveyances purporting to grant the Bates a right‑of‑way were ineffective because the grantor did not own the Alleyway at the time.
- Bate family and successors used the Alleyway openly and continuously from at least about 1948 through 1977 for loading, unloading, parking, and maintenance; use coexisted with other businesses and was not formally protested.
- Appellants bought the Jacob Property in July 1987 and found an unlocked chain across the Alleyway; William Jacob placed a lock on the chain in 1987; Taysom (tenant) cut the chain/posts several times between 2007 and later after being denied a key.
- Appellants sued to quiet title, alternatively claiming adverse possession and trespass; trial court found no express easement but held a prescriptive easement existed in favor of the Bate property for ingress/egress to maintain adjacent buildings, denied extinguishment, and denied trespass damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a prescriptive easement existed | Jacob: use was permissive/accommodation, not adverse; presumption of permissive use should apply | Bates: open, continuous, and adverse use for 20 years creates prescriptive easement; presumption of adverse use applies absent proof of permission | Court: Prescriptive easement established; presumption of adverse use applies once open and continuous use for prescriptive period is shown and Jacobs failed to prove initial permission |
| Sufficiency of evidence for 20‑year continuous use | Jacob: testimony was insufficient and gaps (witness lived away) show lack of continuous or full‑length use | Bates: testimony and historical operations showed continuous, use‑as‑needed along nearly full length from ~1948–1977 | Court: Evidence legally sufficient; findings not clearly erroneous; easement proven by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether Appellants extinguished the easement by placing chain (1982–2007) | Jacob: chain (even unlocked) from 1982 shows adverse interference and began prescriptive period for extinguishment earlier than 1987 | Bates: no evidence chain was locked before 1987; Jacob only locked it in 1987; burden to prove extinguishment on Jacobs | Court: Extinguishment period began when Jacob locked chain in 1987; adverse interference lasted only ~19 years—insufficient; extinguishment not proven |
| Damages for trespass (cutting chain/posts) | Jacob: Taysom vandalized property and should pay damages even if he had right to access | Bates/Taysom: removal was reasonable method to access an easement they possessed; no unnecessary damage | Court: Breaking chain/posts was reasonable under circumstances; no trespass damages awarded |
Key Cases Cited
- Valcarce v. Fitzgerald, 961 P.2d 305 (Utah 1998) (establishes elements for prescriptive easement and presumption of adversity after 20 years of open, continuous use)
- Orton v. Carter, 970 P.2d 1254 (Utah 1998) (prescriptive use can arise from long‑standing amicable arrangements)
- Zollinger v. Frank, 175 P.2d 714 (Utah 1946) (use is adverse if it is against the owner rather than under the owner; burden on servient owner to show permissive use)
- Lunt v. Lance, 186 P.3d 978 (Utah Ct. App. 2008) (discusses abandonment/nonuse and distinguishing abandonment from extinguishment by adverse acts)
- Buckley v. Cox, 247 P.2d 277 (Utah 1952) (requires clear and convincing proof for prescriptive rights)
- Richins v. Struhs, 412 P.2d 314 (Utah 1966) (distinguishes license/consent from mere acquiescence; presumption of adverse use applies absent proof of permission)
- Farmers New World Life Ins. Co. v. Bountiful City, 803 P.2d 1241 (Utah 1990) (dominant‑estate use must not unnecessarily damage servient estate to recover trespass damages)
- Big Cottonwood Tanner Ditch Co. v. Moyle, 174 P.2d 148 (Utah 1946) (easement use must be reasonable and as little burdensome as nature permits)
- Crane v. Crane, 683 P.2d 1062 (Utah 1984) (continuity for prescriptive purposes requires use as often as nature of use requires)
- Jouflas v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 927 P.2d 170 (Utah 1996) (appellate standard: factual findings upheld unless clearly erroneous)