Also known as: unities of ownership · unity of title
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A doctrine under which an easement is extinguished when the same owner acquires title to both the dominant and servient estates. The extinguishment occurs to the extent the owner can make the same uses by virtue of fee ownership that were previously authorized by the easement. The doctrine prevents the burden from reviving upon later severance of the estates.
Green Valley Farm owned crop fields served by a recorded irrigation easement across neighboring pasture. After Green Valley purchased the pasture in fee simple, it routed water across its own land. When Green Valley later sold the pasture to Rivera, the original easement no longer burdened the pasture.
Apex Builders owned a landlocked lot with a recorded access easement over an adjacent construction yard owned by YardCo. After Apex purchased the yard, it crossed the yard as owner of both parcels. When Apex sold the lot to Maria Contracting but retained the yard, Maria held no easement rights over the yard.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Northridge Power held an easement across two parcels to run transmission lines. When Northridge acquired fee title to both parcels, it continued the lines under its ownership rights. Upon later sale of one parcel the buyer took free of the easement because unity had already extinguished it.
Canal Company owned an easement appurtenant to its primary ditch easement across a ranch. After Canal Company bought the ranch in fee, it maintained the ditch under its ownership. Sale of the ranch to a third party left no surviving secondary easement.
Logging Co. held a timber-haul easement across a large timber tract. After Logging Co. purchased only the portion containing the haul road, the easement was extinguished to the extent the purchased strip permitted the same hauling uses. The remainder of the easement survived on the unacquired land.
Unity of ownership extinguishes an easement appurtenant when the same owner acquires both the dominant and servient estates in the same quality of title. The owner can then make the same uses by virtue of fee ownership that the easement previously authorized. The easement does not revive when the owner later sells one parcel.
Supporting sources
Yes. When the owner of an interest in the dominant easement acquires the servient estate, the appurtenant easement is extinguished to the extent the owner can make the authorized uses by virtue of fee ownership. The extinguishment is measured by the overlap between the prior easement uses and the uses permitted by the unified fee title.
Supporting sources
The extinguished easement does not revive. The purchaser of the former servient parcel takes title free of the burden because the merger permanently eliminated the separate easement right. No new grant is required to confirm the absence of the easement.
Supporting sources
No. An easement in gross is extinguished only to the extent the acquired estate permits the same uses the easement authorized. When the purchased strip allows only parking and leaves other authorized uses outside its boundaries, the remainder of the easement in gross survives.
Supporting sources
…abrogate the common law rule that four unities are essential to an estate in joint tenancy: unity of interest, unity of time, unity of title, and unity of possession. (See Hammond v. McArthur (1947) 30 Cal.2d 512, 514 [183 P.2d 1]; McDonald v. Morley (1940) 15 Cal.2d 409, 412 [101 P.2d 690, 129 A.L.R. 810]; 2 Blackstone,…