Case Summaries 04/2024

The Nebraska Court of Appeals found that an owner-installed speed bump did not unreasonably burden an ingress/egress easement. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit were the owners of the dominant estates and had the right of ingress and egress. The defendants were the titled landowners who had installed a speed bump within the easement without talking to the plaintiffs prior. The speed bump was painted. The plaintiffs argued the speed bump was unsafe and could interfere with emergency vehicles. They stated they were concerned about their liability if the speed bump caused accidents or damage. Finally, one owner testified the speed bump caused additional wear to their snowplow equipment, but did not bring a claim for damages.

The court noted that the legal test for such an issue rests on the reasonableness of the action. Both plaintiffs, as the dominate estate, and defendants, as the servient estate, share rights to the easement land. The court had to determine whether the speed bump was “an unreasonable use relative to the [Plaintiffs’] rights.” In this case, the court found the speed bump was allowed. It did not restrict the plaintiffs’ ability to access their properties, nor did it pose an unreasonable risk of damage to those using the easement. Specifically, the plaintiffs did not bring forth any specific reasons why the speed bump would interfere with emergency vehicles or posed unreasonable risk of damage during snow removal. Therefore, the speed bump was allowed.

Barsell v. Rasmussen, No. A-23-446 (Neb. Ct. App. April 9, 2024).