Heydon v. Mediaone of Southeast Michigan, Inc
275 Mich. App. 267, 739 N.W.2d 373 (2007)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A commercial, exclusive easement in gross acquired by prescription is apportionable to a third party for a compatible use, provided the apportionment does not unreasonably increase the burden on the servient estate.
Facts:
- Detroit Edison (Edison) maintained utility poles and electrical lines on property owned by the plaintiffs.
- Edison's right to use the plaintiffs' property was not established by a written agreement but was acquired over time through open, notorious, adverse, and continuous use, creating a prescriptive easement.
- Edison, the holder of this prescriptive easement, entered into an agreement with defendant MediaOne, a cable television company.
- This agreement purported to apportion, or partially assign, Edison's easement rights to MediaOne, allowing MediaOne to place and maintain its cable television lines on Edison's existing utility poles.
- Plaintiffs discovered MediaOne stringing its cable lines on the poles located on their property without having obtained their direct permission.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiffs filed a complaint in the trial court against defendant MediaOne, alleging common-law trespass.
- Both parties filed motions for summary disposition.
- The trial court granted defendant's motion for summary disposition, dismissing the plaintiffs' claims.
- Plaintiffs appealed the trial court's order to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a commercial, exclusive prescriptive easement in gross, held by a utility company for its poles and lines, apportionable to a cable television company for the purpose of stringing cable on the existing poles without unreasonably increasing the burden on the servient estate?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
Yes, a commercial, exclusive prescriptive easement in gross is apportionable. As an issue of first impression in Michigan, the court holds that a commercial easement in gross acquired by prescription can be apportioned if it is exclusive and does not unreasonably increase the burden on the servient estate. The court determined Edison's easement was exclusive because the plaintiffs did not retain the right to erect and maintain power lines, giving Edison the sole privilege. The court then found that apportioning this right to MediaOne for stringing cable lines on the same poles was a compatible use that did not materially or unreasonably increase the burden on the plaintiffs' property. Citing persuasive authority from other jurisdictions, the court reasoned that transmitting television signals via coaxial cable is analogous to transmitting electricity, and thus falls within a reasonable expansion of the easement's original purpose. The plaintiffs' claim that the apportionment would double maintenance and repair use was deemed speculative, as no evidence was presented to show the burden would be unreasonably increased.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant precedent in Michigan property law by explicitly permitting the apportionment of commercial, prescriptive easements in gross. It aligns Michigan with a modern trend facilitating the expansion of utilities like cable television and fiber optics by allowing them to 'piggyback' on existing utility easements. The ruling shifts the focus from whether the use is new to whether the new use creates an unreasonable additional burden, placing a higher evidentiary requirement on landowners who wish to challenge such apportionments. This holding promotes economic efficiency and the shared use of infrastructure, potentially reducing costs for utility and communications companies.
Unlock the full brief for Heydon v. Mediaone of Southeast Michigan, Inc