Strohl

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The facts are undisputed. In late 2000, an owner of a 24-acre parcel in Marin split the property in two by creating a 14-acre parcel and an adjoining 10-acre parcel. The owner kept the 14-acre parcel and conveyed the 10-acre parcel. As part of the conveyance, the recipient of the 10-acre parcel granted an easement to ensure that the 14- acre parcel would benefit from a water well located on the 10-acre parcel. In 2002, plaintiffs became the co-owners of the 14-acre parcel, and in 2004, defendant became the owner of the 10-acre parcel. Unrebutted testimony was presented

1 that the amount of water available from the well has varied, and during dry spells the well has been dry. The easement states that it is “non-exclusive.” It specifies that “[defendant] hereby grants to [plaintiffs] an easement for the existing well, pump, tank and water produced from said well and access to and from said well . . . .” Although the easement provides that plaintiffs are responsible for the well’s repair-and-maintenance costs, it also provides that “[defendant] is responsible for the cost of any new trenching, wiring, piping or changing of routing of water…