California Easement and Eminent Domain Laws (2026)

In California, a prescriptive easement generally takes five years of use that is open, notorious, continuous and adverse. Civil Code section 1007 ties prescription to the five-year period in Code of Civil Procedure sections 318 and 321, and unlike adverse possession of title, a prescriptive easement generally does not require paying property taxes. On the eminent domain side, Proposition 99 (2008) amended article I, section 19 of the California Constitution to bar state and local governments from taking an owner-occupied home in order to convey it to a private person, with exceptions for public works and improvements (including utility projects) and several public-safety purposes.

This page covers both halves of California law: easements between private landowners first, then the government's power to take private property. For other states, see our guide to easement laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-19. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers California statutes and constitutional provisions on private easements (Civil Code; Code of Civil Procedure) and on the condemnation of private property (California Constitution article I, section 19; the Eminent Domain Law in the Code of Civil Procedure; Government Code acquisition and relocation rules). It does not cover adverse possession of title (see California squatters' rights), HOA covenants, zoning or regulatory takings, Public Utilities Code rules for utility and pipeline condemnation, federal condemnation (see eminent domain laws by state), or city and county ordinances.

What Counts as an Easement in California

Civil Code section 801 lists the "land burdens, or servitudes upon land," that "may be attached to other land as incidents or appurtenances, and are then called easements," and the list includes "The right-of-way." A right-of-way across a neighbor's land, such as a shared driveway, is the most familiar example.

The scope of an easement depends on how it came into being. Under Civil Code section 806, "The extent of a servitude is determined by the terms of the grant, or the nature of the enjoyment by which it was acquired." A written easement is read by its terms; a prescriptive easement is limited by the use that created it.

California also recognizes specialized easements by statute. A solar easement is "the right of receiving sunlight across real property of another for any solar energy system" (Civ. Code § 801.5). A conservation easement is a recorded limitation binding on later owners whose purpose "is to retain land predominantly in its natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, forested, or open-space condition" (Civ. Code § 815.1).

Express Easements: Writing and Recording

An express easement is one the owner grants on purpose, usually in a deed or a separate easement agreement. Because an easement is an interest in land, the writing requirement in Civil Code section 1091 applies: an estate in real property, other than an estate at will or for a term not exceeding one year, "can be transferred only by operation of law, or by an instrument in writing, subscribed by the party disposing of the same, or by his agent thereunto authorized by writing."

Recording matters too. Under the recording act, Civil Code section 1214, an unrecorded conveyance of real property is "void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee of the same property, or any part thereof, in good faith and for a valuable consideration, whose conveyance is first duly recorded." A recorded easement shows up in the chain of title; our guide to California property records explains where county records are kept and how to search them.

Implied Easements From Prior Use

California can imply an easement when land is split and one part was already serving the other in an obvious, permanent way. Civil Code section 1104 provides that a transfer of real property "passes all easements attached thereto, and creates in favor thereof an easement to use other real property of the person whose estate is transferred in the same manner and to the same extent as such property was obviously and permanently used by the person whose estate is transferred, for the benefit thereof, at the time when the transfer was agreed upon or completed."

Courts require a showing of intent. In Tusher v. Gabrielsen (Cal. Ct. App. 1998), the Court of Appeal stated that "An easement by implication will not be found absent clear evidence that it was intended by the parties," and added that "the need for 'clear' evidence of intent does not create a 'clear and convincing' standard of proof."

Landlocked Property: Easement by Necessity

California case law recognizes a common-law way of necessity for landlocked land. In Daywalt v. Walker, 217 Cal.App.2d 669 (1963), the Court of Appeal, quoting a legal encyclopedia, set out the rule:

"A way of necessity arises by operation of law when a grantor conveys land shut off from access to a road to the outer world by the grantor's remaining land, or partly by his land and partly by that of a stranger. It can arise only when the relation of grantor and grantee exists between the parties, when the dominant and servient estates are under the same ownership at the time of the conveyance, and when a necessity therefor exists ... A way of necessity cannot exist except in case of strict necessity; that is, when the claimed way furnishes the only means by which access may be had to the claimant's property."

Two limits follow from that language. The landlocked parcel and the land crossed must trace back to one owner who split them, and the way must be the only means of access, not merely the most convenient one.

The Eminent Domain Law addresses a narrower situation. When a public entity acquires property for a public use and the acquisition leaves a neighboring parcel "cut off from utility service or access to a public road," Code of Civil Procedure section 1240.350(a) lets the public entity condemn "such additional property as appears reasonably necessary and appropriate (after taking into account any hardship to the owner of the additional property)" to restore utility service or road access. That section is written for parcels landlocked by a public acquisition, and the power it grants belongs to the public entity. Whether other California codes, such as the Streets and Highways Code, provide a separate procedure is outside the scope of this page.

For utility lines, the Civil Code gives a private owner a statutory route. Under Civil Code section 1001, "Any owner of real property may acquire by eminent domain an appurtenant easement to provide utility service to the owner's property," meaning water, gas, electric, drainage, sewer or telephone service. The power may be used only if "There is a great necessity for the taking," the location "affords the most reasonable service to the property to which it is appurtenant, consistent with the least damage to the burdened property," and the hardship to the owner seeking the easement, if the taking is not permitted, "clearly outweighs any hardship to the owner of the burdened property." A resolution of the legislative body of the city where the land lies (or of the county, if it is outside city limits) must declare those findings (CCP §§ 1245.310, 1245.325). Section 1001 covers utility service, not road access.

A related section, Civil Code section 1002, lets an owner condemn "a temporary right to enter upon adjacent or nearby property to repair or reconstruct land or improvements," on findings of necessity and hardship that the section lists.

Prescriptive Easements in California

A prescriptive easement is a right of use acquired by long, unpermitted use, much as adverse possession can transfer title. California sets the period by cross-reference. Civil Code section 1007 provides that occupancy "for the period prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure as sufficient to bar any action for the recovery of the property confers a title thereto, denominated a title by prescription." That period is five years: Code of Civil Procedure section 318 bars an action to recover real property unless the plaintiff possessed it "within five years before the commencement of the action," and section 321 presumes possession by the legal owner unless the property "has been held and possessed adversely to such legal title, for five years before the commencement of the action." Our page on the California statute of limitations covers the state's other limitation periods.

The elements come from case law. The California Supreme Court stated them in Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, Inc., 35 Cal.3d 564 (1984):

"The elements necessary to establish a prescriptive easement are well settled. The party claiming such an easement must show use of the property which has been open, notorious, continuous and adverse for an uninterrupted period of five years."

The same opinion said that "Whether the elements of prescription are established is a question of fact for the trial court," and that "the existence of a prescriptive easement must be shown by a definite and certain line of travel for the statutory period."

Public land is off limits

Prescription cannot run against public property or public-utility property. Civil Code section 1007 provides that no possession "no matter how long continued of any land, water, water right, easement, or other property whatsoever dedicated to a public use by a public utility, or dedicated to or owned by the state or any public entity, shall ever ripen into any title, interest or right against the owner thereof."

Property taxes generally not required

Adverse possession of title in California requires the claimant to have "timely paid all state, county, or municipal taxes that have been levied and assessed upon the land for the period of five years during which the land has been occupied and claimed" (CCP § 325(b)). A prescriptive easement does not. In Hansen v. Sandridge Partners, L.P. (Cal. Ct. App. 2018), the Court of Appeal stated that a "prescriptive easement does not require payment of taxes" and that "Because of the taxes element, it is more difficult to establish adverse possession than a prescriptive easement." The same court drew a limit: "if the prescriptive interest sought by a claimant is so comprehensive as to supply the equivalent of an estate, the claimant must establish the elements of adverse possession, not those of a prescriptive easement." Because those elements were not met in that case, the claimants could not obtain the exclusive prescriptive easement they sought. For claims to ownership of land rather than a right to use it, see California squatters' rights and adverse possession.

How to Prevent a Prescriptive Easement

California gives owners two statutory tools for stopping a prescriptive easement before it forms.

Posted signs (Civil Code section 1008). No use "no matter how long continued, of any land, shall ever ripen into an easement by prescription, if the owner of such property posts at each entrance to the property or at intervals of not more than 200 feet along the boundary a sign reading substantially as follows: 'Right to pass by permission, and subject to control, of owner: Section 1008, Civil Code.'"

Recorded notice of consent (Civil Code section 813). An owner may record a notice of permissive use. Section 813 makes the recorded notice "conclusive evidence that subsequent use of the land during the time such notice is in effect by the public or any user for any purpose ... is permissive and with consent" in a proceeding over whether the land was dedicated to public use "or whether any user has a prescriptive right in such land." There is an extra step for private users: "In the event of use by other than the general public, any such notices, to be effective, shall also be served by registered mail on the user."

Public use of private land (Civil Code section 1009). Section 1009 limits how public use can turn into a public right. Under subdivision (b), use of property covered by the section by the public after its effective date does not "ripen to confer upon the public or any governmental body or unit a vested right to continue to make such use permanently, in the absence of an express written irrevocable offer of dedication." Two exceptions appear in the section. Under subdivision (d), where a governmental entity spends public funds on visible improvements on or across private land, or on cleaning or maintenance related to the public use, so that the owner knows or should know of the public use, that use, "in the absence of either express permission by the owner to continue such use or the taking by the owner of reasonable steps to enjoin, remove or prohibit such use, shall after five years ripen to confer upon the governmental entity a vested right to continue such use." And under subdivision (e), subdivision (b) "shall not apply to any coastal property which lies within 1,000 yards inland of the mean high tide line of the Pacific Ocean, and harbors, estuaries, bays and inlets thereof," subject to limits stated in that subdivision. For that coastal property, public use is not evidence of implied dedication if the owner posts section 1008 signs and renews any that are removed at least once a year (or publishes an annual newspaper notice), records a section 813 notice, or enters into a written agreement with a federal, state or local agency providing for the public use; while that action is in effect, the owner may not obstruct public use appropriate under the permission given (§ 1009(f)).

Shared Driveways: Maintenance, Scope and Enforcement

Civil Code section 845(a) puts the maintenance duty on the people who benefit: "The owner of any easement in the nature of a private right-of-way, or of any land to which any such easement is attached, shall maintain it in repair." When several owners use the same right-of-way, section 845(b) says that, "In the absence of an agreement, the cost shall be shared proportionately to the use made of the easement by each owner."

If the easement is obstructed, the owner it benefits can go to court. Civil Code section 809 provides that "The owner of any estate in a dominant tenement, or the occupant of such tenement, may maintain an action for the enforcement of an easement attached thereto." What the easement holder may do is limited by section 806, quoted above: the terms of the grant or the use by which the right was acquired.

How an Easement Ends

Civil Code section 811 lists four ways a servitude is extinguished:

1. When the right to the servitude and the land it burdens come to the same person.
2. When the burdened land is destroyed.
3. When the easement owner performs, or assents to, an act on either parcel "which is incompatible with its nature or exercise."
4. "When the servitude was acquired by enjoyment, by disuse thereof by the owner of the servitude for the period prescribed for acquiring title by enjoyment." By its own terms, this nonuse rule is limited to a servitude "acquired by enjoyment."

California also has a quiet-title route for abandoned easements. Under Civil Code section 887.050(a), for purposes of that chapter, an easement is abandoned if all three conditions hold for the 20 years immediately before the action is filed: "(1) The easement is not used at any time. (2) No separate property tax assessment is made of the easement or, if made, no taxes are paid on the assessment. (3) No instrument creating, reserving, transferring, or otherwise evidencing the easement is recorded." Because all three conditions must hold, recording an instrument evidencing the easement during that period takes it outside this definition. The easement owner "may at any time record a notice of intent to preserve the easement," and the easement is not abandoned under the chapter if that notice is recorded within the 20 years before the action, or after the action begins and before judgment under section 887.070 (Civ. Code § 887.060).

Eminent Domain in California

California's takings clause differs in wording from the federal one: it reaches property that is damaged as well as taken. Article I, section 19(a) of the California Constitution provides: "Private property may be taken or damaged for a public use and only when just compensation, ascertained by a jury unless waived, has first been paid to, or into court for, the owner." The federal Fifth Amendment says "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

In Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the takings challenged there, carried out under a development plan that served a public purpose, satisfied the Fifth Amendment's public-use requirement, and added that "nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power." Our national guide to eminent domain laws by state covers federal condemnation and other states' responses.

Can California Take Property for a Private Developer?

California's main response to Kelo protects homes. Proposition 99 amended article I, section 19 on June 3, 2008, adding this subdivision:

"(b) The State and local governments are prohibited from acquiring by eminent domain an owner-occupied residence for the purpose of conveying it to a private person."

The protected property is defined narrowly. An "owner-occupied residence" is "real property that is improved with a single-family residence such as a detached home, condominium, or townhouse and that is the owner or owners' principal place of residence for at least one year prior to the State or local government's initial written offer to purchase the property" (art. I, § 19(e)(3)). The definition "also includes a residential dwelling unit attached to or detached from such a single-family residence which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons." By its terms the bar reaches only those kinds of property; it does not mention businesses, rental buildings or vacant land.

The bar also has exceptions. Under subdivision (c), it does not apply when government takes property "for the purpose of protecting public health and safety; preventing serious, repeated criminal activity; responding to an emergency; or remedying environmental contamination that poses a threat to public health and safety." Under subdivision (d), it does not apply to "acquiring private property for a public work or improvement." That term is defined broadly in subdivision (e)(5) to include facilities and infrastructure for education, police, fire protection, parks, streets or highways, public transit, railroads, airports and seaports, as well as "utility, common carrier or other similar projects such as energy-related, communication-related, water-related and wastewater-related facilities or infrastructure; projects identified by a State or local government for recovery from natural disasters; and private uses incidental to, or necessary for, the public work or improvement."

Who Can Use Eminent Domain in California

The Eminent Domain Law starts with a public-use requirement. Code of Civil Procedure section 1240.010 provides that "The power of eminent domain may be exercised to acquire property only for a public use," and that when the Legislature authorizes eminent domain for a purpose by statute, "such action is deemed to be a declaration by the Legislature that such use, purpose, object, or function is a public use."

The condemnor must also hold statutory authority for the particular use. Under section 1240.020, the power may be exercised "only by a person authorized by statute to exercise the power of eminent domain to acquire such property for that use." Any condemnor, public or private, therefore needs a statute that authorizes the particular use; the Public Utilities Code provisions for utilities are outside the scope of this page.

Every taking must meet three necessity findings in section 1240.030: "(a) The public interest and necessity require the project. (b) The project is planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. (c) The property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project."

Steps Before a Taking: Appraisal, Offer and Resolution of Necessity

A public entity has to follow a sequence before it can file a condemnation case.

1. Appraisal and negotiation. "Real property shall be appraised before the initiation of negotiations," and the owner "shall be given an opportunity to accompany the appraiser during his or her inspection of the property" (Gov. Code § 7267.1(b)). The entity "shall make every reasonable effort to acquire expeditiously real property by negotiation" (§ 7267.1(a)).
2. Written offer. Before adopting a resolution of necessity, the entity must make an offer for the full amount it believes is just compensation, and "The amount shall not be less than the public entity's approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property" (Gov. Code § 7267.2). With the offer, it must give the owner "an informational pamphlet detailing the process of eminent domain and the property owner's rights under the Eminent Domain Law." At the time of the offer, the entity "shall offer to pay the reasonable costs, not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000), of an independent appraisal ordered by the owner," conducted by an appraiser licensed by the Office of Real Estate Appraisers (CCP § 1263.025(a)).
3. Notice and hearing. Before adopting a resolution of necessity, the entity sends the owner notice by first-class mail. The notice must warn that "Failure to file a written request to appear and be heard within 15 days after the notice was mailed will result in waiver of the right to appear and be heard" (CCP § 1245.235(b)(3)).
4. Resolution of necessity. "A public entity may exercise the power of eminent domain only if it has adopted a resolution of necessity" (CCP § 1240.040). The resolution must state that the section 7267.2 offer was made, or that it was not made "because the owner cannot be located with reasonable diligence" (CCP § 1245.230).

The resolution carries heavy weight in court. "Except as otherwise provided by statute," it "conclusively establishes" the three necessity findings in section 1240.030 (CCP § 1245.250(a)). When a local public entity takes electric, gas or water public utility property, the resolution instead "creates a rebuttable presumption" (§ 1245.250(b)). When a local public entity takes property not located entirely within its own boundaries, the resolution "creates a presumption that the matters referred to in Section 1240.030 are true," and "This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence" (§ 1245.250(c)). And the resolution loses its conclusive effect "to the extent that its adoption or contents were influenced or affected by gross abuse of discretion by the governing body" (CCP § 1245.255(b)).

Challenging a Taking and Orders of Possession

An owner can seek court review of a resolution of necessity in two ways under Code of Civil Procedure section 1245.255(a): before the condemnation case begins, "by petition for a writ of mandate pursuant to Section 1085," or after it begins, "by objection to the right to take."

Section 1250.360 lists grounds for objecting to the right to take, including that the condemnor "is not authorized by statute" to take for the stated purpose, that "The stated purpose is not a public use," that it does not intend to devote the property to that purpose, or that "There is no reasonable probability that the plaintiff will devote the described property to the stated purpose within (1) seven years, or (2) 10 years where the property is taken pursuant to the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973, or (3) such longer period as is reasonable." An objection not raised by demurrer or answer is deemed waived, subject to the court's power to permit an amendment of the answer (CCP § 1250.345).

Early possession. "At any time before entry of judgment, the plaintiff may deposit with the State Treasury the probable amount of compensation, based on an appraisal, that will be awarded in the proceeding" (CCP § 1255.010). A condemnor seeking possession before judgment files a motion that must tell the owner: "If you oppose this motion you must serve the plaintiff and file with the court a written opposition to the motion within 30 days from the date you were served with this motion." For unoccupied property, the hearing must be set "not less than 60 days after service of the notice of motion on the record owner" (CCP § 1255.410). If the property is lawfully occupied by a person dwelling on it or by a farm or business operation, the motion must be served "not less than 90 days prior to the hearing on the motion" (§ 1255.410(b)).

When the entity adopts a resolution but does not sue. If a public entity "has not commenced an eminent domain proceeding to acquire the property within six months after the date of adoption of the resolution," the owner may bring an inverse condemnation action to "Require the public entity to take the property and pay compensation therefor" and to "Recover damages from the public entity for any interference with the possession and use of the property resulting from adoption of the resolution" (CCP § 1245.260(a)). No government claim needs to be presented first, but the action "shall be commenced within one year and six months after the date the public entity adopted the resolution of necessity" (§ 1245.260(b)). The same remedy applies if the entity filed the case but did not attempt diligently to serve the complaint and summons within six months after filing, and it is lost if the entity files the case or rescinds the resolution before the owner sues (§ 1245.260(a), (c)). In lieu of that action, or if the period has run, the owner "may obtain a writ of mandate to compel the public entity, within such time as the court deems appropriate, to rescind the resolution of necessity or to commence an eminent domain proceeding" (§ 1245.260(f)).

How Just Compensation Is Calculated

The basic measure is fair market value. Code of Civil Procedure section 1263.310 provides that "The measure of this compensation is the fair market value of the property taken," and section 1263.320(a) defines it:

"The fair market value of the property taken is the highest price on the date of valuation that would be agreed to by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular or urgent necessity for so doing, nor obliged to sell, and a buyer, being ready, willing, and able to buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each dealing with the other with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable and available."

Under the Constitution, a jury sets the amount unless the owner waives a jury (art. I, § 19(a)).

Partial takings. When only part of a parcel is taken, the owner is also compensated for injury to the remainder, which "is the amount of the damage to the remainder reduced by the amount of the benefit to the remainder" (CCP § 1263.410(b)). If the benefit exceeds the damage, the excess may be deducted only from goodwill compensation under section 1263.510, if any; it "shall not be deducted from the compensation required to be awarded for the property taken or from the other compensation required by this chapter."

Business goodwill. The owner of a business on the property taken, or on the remainder, "shall be compensated for loss of goodwill if the owner proves all of the following": the loss is caused by the taking, it "cannot reasonably be prevented by a relocation of the business or by taking steps and adopting procedures that a reasonably prudent person would take and adopt in preserving the goodwill," it will not be paid as relocation assistance under Government Code section 7262, and it will not be duplicated in other compensation (CCP § 1263.510(a)).

Interest. Interest on the award is calculated for each calendar quarter at "the apportionment rate for the immediately preceding calendar quarter" (CCP § 1268.350(b)).

Attorney Fees, Relocation Payments and Unused Property

Litigation expenses on an unreasonable offer. Code of Civil Procedure section 1250.410(a) requires the condemnor to file and serve its final offer, and the owner its final demand, at least 20 days before the trial on compensation, and "These offers and demands shall be the only offers and demands considered by the court in determining the entitlement, if any, to litigation expenses." Under subdivision (b), if the court, "on motion of the defendant made within 30 days after entry of judgment, finds that the offer of the plaintiff was unreasonable and that the demand of the defendant was reasonable viewed in the light of the evidence admitted and the compensation awarded," the owner's costs include litigation expenses. Those are defined as "reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including reasonable expert witness and appraiser fees" (§ 1250.410(e)). The test is reasonableness; the statute sets no fixed percentage.

Litigation expenses on dismissal. "Subject to subdivisions (b) and (c)," the court "shall award the defendant his or her litigation expenses whenever: (1) The proceeding is wholly or partly dismissed for any reason. (2) Final judgment in the proceeding is that the plaintiff cannot acquire property it sought to acquire in the proceeding" (CCP § 1268.610(a)).

Relocation assistance. When a public project displaces a person, Government Code section 7262(a) provides for "actual moving and related expenses as the public entity determines to be reasonable and necessary." For businesses and farms, it includes search expenses for a replacement business or farm "not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000)" and expenses to reestablish "a displaced farm, nonprofit organization, or small business at its new site, but not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000)." A displaced business or farm may, in the circumstances section 7262(c) lists, elect instead a fixed payment of "not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000)." For a home the owner owned and occupied for at least 180 days before negotiations began, Government Code section 7263 adds a replacement-housing payment "not to exceed twenty-two thousand five hundred dollars ($22,500)," generally conditioned on buying and occupying a replacement dwelling within the period section 7263(c) sets. A displaced occupant of at least 90 days who is not eligible for that payment may receive up to $5,250 toward renting a comparable replacement dwelling (Gov. Code § 7264).

Property the government does not use. Property acquired under a resolution of necessity that "is not used for the public use stated in the resolution of necessity within 10 years of the adoption of the resolution of necessity, shall be sold," unless the governing body adopts a resolution under subdivision (a) of that section or reauthorizes the existing public use "by a vote of at least two-thirds" (CCP § 1245.245(b)). If the entity adopts neither a new-use resolution nor a reauthorization, and the property was not used for the stated public use in the meantime, it must offer the former owner "the right of first refusal to purchase the property" at "the present market value, as determined by independent licensed appraisers," or, for a former single-family residence whose former owner certifies low or moderate income, at an affordable price no greater than the original acquisition price adjusted for inflation and no greater than fair market value (CCP § 1245.245(f)). If residential property is later sold as surplus without having been put to the stated public use, the entity must pay the former owner "the sum of any financial gain between the original acquisition price, adjusted for inflation, and the final sale price" (§ 1245.245(h)). The entity must also give the former owner written notice that these rights may accrue (§ 1245.245(i)).

California Easement and Eminent Domain Rules at a Glance

Related California Property Guides

• Easement laws by state
• Eminent domain laws by state
• California squatters' rights and adverse possession
• California property records
• California statute of limitations

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about California easement and eminent domain law. It is not legal advice. For a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in California or the public agency involved.

Last updated: 2026-10-19.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long does it take to get a prescriptive easement in California?

Generally five years. The California Supreme Court requires use that is open, notorious, continuous and adverse for an uninterrupted five years along a definite line of travel (Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, 1984; Civ. Code § 1007; CCP §§ 318, 321). Prescription never runs against property owned by the state or a public entity, or dedicated to public use by a public utility.

Do you have to pay property taxes to get a prescriptive easement in California?

Generally no. The Court of Appeal stated in Hansen v. Sandridge Partners (2018) that a prescriptive easement does not require payment of taxes. Adverse possession of title does require five years of timely paid taxes (CCP § 325(b)). The same court held that a claimed easement so comprehensive that it amounts to the equivalent of ownership must meet the adverse-possession elements, including taxes.

How do you prevent a prescriptive easement in California?

Civil Code § 1008 blocks prescription if the owner posts a sign reading substantially Right to pass by permission, and subject to control, of owner: Section 1008, Civil Code, at each entrance or at intervals of not more than 200 feet along the boundary. An owner may instead record a notice of permissive use under Civil Code § 813, which must also be served by registered mail on users other than the general public.

What happens if my property is landlocked in California?

California case law recognizes a way of necessity only when the landlocked parcel and the land crossed were owned by one person who split them, and only on strict necessity, meaning the way is the only means of access (Daywalt v. Walker, 1963). Separately, CCP § 1240.350 lets a public entity condemn access for a parcel that its own acquisition cut off from a public road or utility service. Civil Code § 1001 also lets an owner condemn an easement for utility service (water, gas, electric, drainage, sewer or telephone), but not road access, if great necessity and the other statutory findings are established.

Who pays to maintain a shared driveway easement in California?

Civil Code § 845 places the repair duty on the owners of the easement and of the land it benefits. If they have no agreement, the cost is shared in proportion to each owner's use of the easement.

How does an easement end in California?

Civil Code § 811 ends an easement by merger of the two parcels in one owner, destruction of the burdened land, an incompatible act by or with the consent of the easement owner, or, for an easement acquired by use, nonuse for the prescriptive period. Civil Code § 887.050 also allows a quiet-title action for an easement unused for 20 years with no separate tax assessment paid and no recorded instrument, unless its owner recorded a notice of intent to preserve it in time (Civ. Code § 887.060).

Can California take my home for a private developer?

Proposition 99 (2008) bars state and local governments from taking an owner-occupied residence to convey it to a private person (Cal. Const. art. I, § 19(b)). The bar does not apply to takings for a public work or improvement, public health and safety, serious repeated criminal activity, emergencies or environmental contamination, and it covers only an owner-occupied residence as defined: property improved with a single-family residence such as a detached home, condominium or townhouse that has been the owner's principal residence for at least one year before the government's initial written offer, plus an attached or detached dwelling unit with complete independent living facilities.

Can California use eminent domain for a pipeline or utility project?

The Proposition 99 home protection does not apply to acquisitions for a public work or improvement, which the Constitution defines to include utility, common carrier and energy-related facilities (Cal. Const. art. I, § 19(d), (e)(5)). Any condemnor must be authorized by statute for the particular use (CCP § 1240.020) and must meet the three necessity findings in CCP § 1240.030.

How is just compensation calculated in California?

Compensation is the fair market value of the property taken, defined as the highest price a willing seller and willing buyer would agree to on the valuation date (CCP §§ 1263.310, 1263.320), ascertained by a jury unless waived (Cal. Const. art. I, § 19(a)). In a partial taking, damage to the remainder is added, reduced by any benefit to the remainder (CCP § 1263.410).

Does the government pay attorney fees in a California eminent domain case?

Two provisions address this. Under CCP § 1250.410, the owner's attorney and appraiser fees are awarded if the court finds the condemnor's final offer unreasonable and the owner's final demand reasonable, comparing only the final offer and demand each side filed and served at least 20 days before the compensation trial, on a motion made within 30 days after judgment. Under CCP § 1268.610, subject to its stated exceptions, they are also awarded when the case is dismissed or the condemnor cannot acquire the property.

How long do I have to oppose an order of possession in California eminent domain?

The motion must tell the owner that a written opposition must be served and filed within 30 days from the date the owner was served with the motion (CCP § 1255.410). For unoccupied property, the hearing must be set at least 60 days after service on the record owner. If the property is lawfully occupied by a person living there or by a farm or business operation, the motion must be served at least 90 days before the hearing.