Henley v. CONTINENTAL CABLEVISION OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, INC.
1985 Mo. App. LEXIS 3475, 692 S.W.2d 825 (1985)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An exclusive easement in gross is apportionable by its holder, and the addition of new technology, such as a television cable, does not constitute an additional burden on the servient estate if it is consistent with the original purpose of the easement and represents a natural technological evolution.
Facts:
- In 1922, the predecessors to the University Park subdivision trustees were granted the right to establish electric, telephone, and telegraphic services over the rear five feet of all lots in the subdivision and to grant easements for such purposes.
- In July and August of 1922, the trustees granted easements to Southwestern Bell Telephone Company and Union Electric to construct, operate, and maintain their respective lines and equipment.
- The grantors (the trustees) did not retain any right or express any intention to use the five-foot strips for their own electric or telephone systems.
- In 1981 and 1982, Continental Cablevision acquired licenses from both Southwestern Bell and Union Electric to use their easements.
- Continental Cablevision then entered upon the easements and erected its own cables and wires on the existing utility poles for the purpose of transmitting television programming.
Procedural Posture:
- The trustees of University Park subdivision (Plaintiffs) filed a petition in the trial court against Continental Cablevision of St. Louis County, Inc. (Defendant).
- The petition sought an injunction to compel the removal of defendant's cables, alleging a continuing trespass, and also sought monetary damages.
- Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, supported by matters outside the pleadings.
- The trial court sustained the defendant's motion and dismissed the plaintiffs' petition.
- Plaintiffs (Appellants) appealed the trial court's dismissal to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District (the court issuing this opinion).
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 cable television company commit trespass by attaching its cables to existing utility poles located on easements granted for electric and telephone services, when the original grants did not specifically authorize the transmission of television signals?
Opinions:
Majority - Carl R. Gaertner
No, a cable company does not commit trespass by using existing utility easements. The easements are 'easements in gross' and are exclusive, making them apportionable by the utility companies. The term 'exclusive' means that the servient landowner (the grantor) is excluded from participating in the rights granted, which is the case here as the trustees never intended to operate their own utility services. Therefore, the utilities could validly license their rights to Continental Cablevision. Furthermore, adding a coaxial cable to existing poles is not an additional burden on the property; it is a natural evolution of the communication and electrical transmission technology contemplated by the original grants. The court reasoned that interpreting old grants in light of scientific and technological progress is necessary and in the public interest, as it allows for the efficient use of existing infrastructure.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant precedent in Missouri for interpreting the scope of utility easements in the context of technological advancements. By defining an 'exclusive' easement in gross based on the grantor's exclusion from use, the court facilitates the apportionment of such easements for commercial purposes. The ruling promotes the efficient expansion of new communication services like cable television by allowing them to utilize existing infrastructure, thereby avoiding the costs and environmental impact of creating redundant easements. This approach ensures that old legal instruments remain relevant and adaptable to modern technology, so long as the new use is consistent with the original grant's purpose and does not materially increase the burden on the land.
Unlock the full brief for Henley v. CONTINENTAL CABLEVISION OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, INC.