Farmer v. Kentucky Utilities Co.
1982 Ky. LEXIS 316, 642 S.W.2d 579 (1982)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The owner of a prescriptive easement for a primary purpose, such as overhanging utility lines, also possesses a secondary easement to enter the underlying servient estate to perform reasonable and necessary maintenance that allows for the enjoyment of the primary easement.
Facts:
- In 1923, Kentucky Utilities Company constructed a transmission line with wires that overhang a tract of land.
- The poles supporting the wires are located on adjacent property, not on the land in question.
- In 1966, Kentucky Utilities entered the property and used a chemical spray to clear undergrowth, leading to a lawsuit by the then-owner that was settled for $700.
- In 1978, Elva Skidmore Farmer acquired the property from her mother.
- The property had been unoccupied since 1976.
- In 1980, Kentucky Utilities hired a service company that entered Farmer's property and cut trees and other vegetation from beneath the transmission wires.
Procedural Posture:
- Elva Skidmore Farmer sued Kentucky Utilities Company in the Harlan Circuit Court (trial court), alleging trespass and seeking damages.
- Following a bench trial, the trial court found that Kentucky Utilities had a prescriptive easement for the overhanging wires but no right to enter the land for clearing, ruling in favor of Farmer.
- Kentucky Utilities Company, as appellant, appealed the trial court's decision.
- The Court of Appeals, an intermediate appellate court, reversed the trial court, holding that the prescriptive easement included an incidental right to enter for maintenance.
- Elva Skidmore Farmer, as movant, sought review from the Supreme Court of Kentucky, which granted review.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a prescriptive easement for overhanging utility lines include an implied secondary right to enter the servient estate to clear vegetation for maintenance purposes?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Sternberg
Yes. A prescriptive easement to hang utility lines necessarily includes the secondary right to enter the property underneath the lines for reasonable maintenance and repairs. An easement includes not only the primary right but also what is necessary for its reasonable use and proper enjoyment. The owner of the servient estate, Farmer, cannot use her land in a way that interferes with the primary easement, such as allowing vegetation to grow into the wires. However, the utility company's right to enter is limited to what is necessary for the natural and reasonable use of its primary easement, creating a factual issue as to whether the extent of their clearing was appropriate.
Dissenting - Justice Aker
No. The prescriptive right is limited by the use to which it was put during the statutory period, and it does not expand thereafter. Kentucky Utilities' prescriptive right was confined to overhanging lines across the property, as its physical entry onto the land was consistently challenged through trespass actions. Unlike an easement created by express agreement, a prescriptive easement's scope is strictly defined by the hostile use that created it. To permit Kentucky Utilities to now enter the land and destroy property is an unreasonable expansion of the limited rights acquired by prescription.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of prescriptive easements by establishing that they, like express easements, carry implied secondary rights necessary for the enjoyment of the primary easement. It solidifies the rights of utility companies to maintain their existing lines, which is crucial for public infrastructure. However, the ruling also protects landowners by creating a 'reasonableness' standard, ensuring that the exercise of these secondary rights is not unlimited. This creates a basis for future litigation to focus on the factual question of whether a utility's specific maintenance activities were necessary and not overly burdensome to the landowner.
