Baccouche

Baccouche v. Blankenship

Good Law
154 Cal. App. 4th 1551·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1516·65 Cal. Rptr. 3d 659
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 11, 2007B192291California2,709 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

We deal with the enforceability of an easement for equine use. Appellant Henri Baccouche, who now owns the servient tenement, argues that the easement granted by his predecessor violates a municipal ordinance that restricts the keeping of horses on residential property, because his lot is vacant land. Respondent John M. Blankenship, who owns the dominant tenement, argues the equine use is accessory to use of his residential property, hence that it is valid. We agree that Blankenship has a valid easement. But applicable zoning ordinances prohibit the keeping of horses on a lot not developed for residential use. For that reason, the easement is unenforceable insofar as it would allow a use in violation of those ordinances.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

We take our factual summary from the stipulated facts at trial. Blankenship owns a 22,000-square-foot lot in the Sunland area of the City of Los Angeles (City). His neighbor, Baccouche, owns a 170,319.6-square-foot lot, which is contiguous to the Blankenship lot. Both lots are zoned RE40-1 (residential estate) by the City. Blankenship’s predecessors in interest included Eugene Elson. Baccouche’s predecessors included Rolf…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.