Fehr v. Keenan CA6

Filed 12/9/13 Fehr v. Keenan CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

GERALD K. FEHR, et al., H037697 (Santa Cruz County Plaintiffs and Appellants, Super. Ct. No. CV164972)

v.

DAVID KEENAN, et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

Appellants Gerald K. Fehr and Teresa K. Fehr, individually and as trustees of the Fehr Revocable Trust dated April 30, 1991, (Fehrs) and respondents David Keenan and Jaeohk C. Keenan (Keenans), own adjacent property in a residential subdivision located in the City of Watsonville. The Fehrs brought an action against the Keenans, which sought to quiet title to an alleged appurtenant easement, a six-foot wide strip between their properties, on various theories and for declaratory and injunctive relief. Following a court trial, the court determined that "[n]o implied, express, or prescriptive easement exists in favor of the Fehrs." On appeal, the Fehrs claim that, as a matter of law, their property has an implied easement and an express easement over a six-foot-wide walk that was created by the 1912 recordation of a subdivision map and continued by subsequent conveyances of the property. They also assert that they satisfied all the elements necessary to establish a

1

prescriptive easement appurtenant to their property. Finally, the Fehrs maintain that the Keenans lack standing to challenge the Fehrs' easement over the walkway and their use of the walkway because "the State of California is the true legal and equitable owner of the Walkway arising from the July 1963 property tax foreclosure of the reserved areas adjacent to Gonazales Park as shown in the Subdivision Map, including the Walkway . . . ." Since the Fehrs failed to provide this court with a record adequate to evaluate their contentions, we cannot conclude that there was reversible error. I Procedural History On August 21, 2009, the Fehrs filed a verified complaint seeking to quiet title to an implied easement and to a proscriptive easement and for declaratory and injunctive relief. It indicated that a subdivision map, filed in 1912, created lot 29, the title to which is now held by the Fehrs' revocable family trust, and lots 30 and 31, which are now owned by the Keenans. The complaint alleged that a six-foot-wide right of way between lot 29 and lot 30 was created by the filing and recording of the subdivision map and the subsequent sale of the subdivided lots with reference to that map. It averred that, since about October 20, 2008, the Fehrs had been the owners of an easement of ingress, egress and other uses over that right of way. The complaint also alleged that the Fehrs were the owners of a prescriptive easement for ingress, egress, cultivation and house maintenance. The Fehrs filed a verified first amended complaint. It added a cause of action to quiet title on the theory that an express six-foot-wide right of way, for ingress, egress, and other uses, was created by the original grant deed and transferred by all subsequent conveyances.