What To Do With Your Neighbor’s Shared Driveway
A common legal dispute between adjacent landowners arises when the landowners share a driveway. You could argue with your neighbor because your neighbor keeps blocking your access by parking his spare vehicle right in the middle of the driveway. You and your neighbor could also argue about who is responsible for keeping the driveway in good repair. Or you could buy a property, believing that you have access across a shared driveway or easement, only to discover that your new neighbor believes differently. Although these kinds of property disputes can be frustrating, the law can usually provide a clear resolution of the dispute. So let’s discuss a few of the most common issues that arise with shared driveways.
I share a driveway with my neighbor, can my neighbor park a vehicle in the driveway or otherwise block my access to my property?
Both your rights and your neighbor’s rights to the driveway depend on the nature of the driveway’s legal ownership. Typically, shared driveways fall into one of three categories of legal ownership: (1) the entire driveway is owned by one neighbor but the other neighbor has an easement over the driveway (a right to use the driveway); (2) ownership of the driveway is divided in two, with one neighbor owning part and the other neighbor owning the rest; and (3) ownership is a combination of categories (1) and (2), so both neighbors own part of the driveway and have an easement to use the other neighbor’s part.
Your rights to a shared driveway under category (1)
If your driveway falls into category one, then whether you can stop your neighbor from parking depends on the scope of the easement across the driveway. The “scope” of the easement just means the specific characteristics of the easement such as the physical dimensions of it as well as the uses the easement permits. So, for example, if you own the driveway and your neighbor has an easement authorizing him to use the driveway to access his property, then you most likely have a legal right to prohibit him from doing anything beyond driving across the driveway (so you can prohibit him from parking on the driveway or from otherwise blocking your access).
Similarly, if you have an easement across a driveway owned by your neighbor, you may also be able to prohibit your neighbor from blocking your access. This is because owners of land that are encumbered by easements have a legal obligation to not interfere with the easement’s reasonable use. And blocking access to your property would almost certainly be an unreasonable interference with your easement right. See Metro. Water Dist. of Salt Lake & Sandy v. SHCH Alaska Tr., 2019 UT 62, ¶ 49, 452 P.3d 1158 (“Under Utah's property law, an easement holder has the right to use its easement (the scope of which defines the extent of the permitted use) in a way that does not unreasonably interfere with the property rights of the owner of the land. And the owner of the land has the right to continue using its land so long as it does not unreasonably interfere with the easement holder's use of its easement.”).
Your rights to a shared driveway under category (2)
If your driveway falls into category (2) then whether you can stop your neighbor from parking will depend on where the neighbor is parking. If your neighbor is parking entirely on his half of the driveway than there is nothing you can legally do to prevent it. This is because both of you have a legal right to use your part of the driveway in any way you see fit. For this reason, you should have a clear understanding of where the property line crosses the driveway.
Your rights to a shared driveway under category (3)
Finally, if your driveway falls into category (3) then whether you can stop your neighbor from parking will depend both on where the parking occurs and the nature of your right to the place your neighbor is parking. If your neighbor is parking on his property, then you can only prohibit him from doing so if the parking is unreasonably interfering with your easement right to use that portion of the property. And if your neighbor is parking on your property, you can only prohibit him from doing so if such a prohibition would not unreasonably interfere with his easement right to use your property.
I have an easement across my neighbor’s property. Who is responsible for the easement’s maintenance?
In Utah, the default rule for the maintenance of an easement is that, where the parties have not agreed otherwise, the burden of upkeep should be shared between the owner of the land and the owner of the easement in proportion to their relative use of the road, as nearly as it is possible to determine relative use. So if you are the only one that uses the portion of your neighbor’s property as a roadway, then you would be wholly responsible for the maintenance of the roadway. But, on the other hand, if you and your neighbor use it equally, then you would be responsible for half the costs to maintain it. See Oak Lane Homeowners Ass'n v. Griffin, 2011 UT 25, ¶ 21, 255 P.3d 677.
I bought property from someone who accessed the property through an easement on a neighbor’s land, can I keep using the easement?
Most likely yes. An easement can be owned “in gross” or “appurtenant.” “In gross” means that the easement belongs to an individual no matter where that individual lives. An easement “appurtenant” means the easement belongs to the owner of the adjacent property. The default rule in Utah is that easement’s are appurtenant unless the facts of the situation clearly suggest otherwise. This means that if you buy property from someone and that person used an easement across neighboring land to access that property, then you will most likely be able to continue using that easement.
The only thing that would prevent that easement right from transferring to you is if it was clear under the facts of your situation that the easement belonged to the previous owner personally, and no one intended for the easement to transfer to the next owner of the land.
I (or the previous owner) have been crossing my neighbor’s land to access my property for a long time but there isn’t a recorded easement on title or a written agreement establishing the easement. Now my neighbor wants to stop me from crossing his property. What can I do?
This is a surprisingly common situation. Fortunately, the law provides a few avenues for preserving an existing right or practice for using your neighbor’s land. In fact, Utah recognizes at least 3 forms of unwritten easements that may be helpful in this situation: (1) easements by prescription, (2) easements by necessity, and (3) easements by implication.
An easement by prescription can be established over time through consistent use. Basically, if you have been using a portion of your neighbor’s property for an extended period of time (in Utah it must be for 20 years), then you may have acquired a legal right to continue using the property in the same way you (or the previous owner) have historically used it.
An easement by necessity can be established when property was divided into two or more lots and it is reasonably necessary to cross one of the lots to get to the other. So, for example, if John divided his property in two and sold one lot to Adam and the other to Brenda, but the road providing access to the properties only touches Adam’s property, then Brenda would likely have an easement by necessity (across Adam’s property) to access her property. And if she later sold her property to someone else, then the new owner would maintain that easement.
Finally, an easement by implication (like an easement by necessity) is created when an owner sells a portion of land which he or she owns. Under the doctrine of easement by implication it is implied in the sale that the owner is also selling a right to use any apparent or visible easements over the portion of the land the owner retains. The only requirements are that the easement must be apparent (or obvious) and it must have been used by the owner to access the portion of land the owner has sold. The difference between this kind of easement and an easement by necessity (discussed above), is that this type of easement does not have to be necessary for access. It only needs to be an existing and obvious easement at the time of sale. (An easement by necessity, in contrast, does not have to be existing and obvious at the time of the sale. In fact, in many cases, the easement does not exist until the land is sold.)
Here’s an example of an easement by implication. Suppose an owner of an apartment complex sells one of the apartments to Brad. If the apartment is served by common halls and stairways, easements in the halls and stairways are likely conveyed by implication even though there is no express wording to that effect written into the deed of conveyance (most contracts and leases contain express wording to this effect). This is true even if Brad could enter and exit his apartment through a fire escape attached directly to his apartment. So even though the hallways and stairs are not “necessary” to access Brad’s apartment, an inference can be made from the surrounding circumstances (in this case, the hallways and stairways would have to be apparent, obvious, and visible) under which the conveyance was made rather than from the language used in the contract. See Tschaggeny v. Union Pac. Land Res. Corp., 555 P.2d 277, 280 (Utah 1976).
So those are just a few examples of the types of property disputes that can arise between neighbors. If you have a dispute with a neighbor over the use of a shared driveway, easement, or other land dispute, you are not alone. Fortunately, there are laws in place to protect you. If you are unsure about your rights, schedule a free consultation to go over your options.