Also known as: longum tempus · longus usus · prescription · time immemorial · immemorial use
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A principle of property law under which long-continued and uninterrupted use of another's land that exceeds living memory establishes an easement by prescription. The maxim supplies the temporal foundation for acquiring servitudes when the use meets the requirements of adversity and continuity over the prescriptive period.
Lily Lopez's delivery trucks crossed a gravel path on Lance Lee's adjacent parcel every weekday for the statutory period. Lee installed no barriers and issued no protests during that entire span. Lopez now asserts an easement and the court examines whether the use satisfied the continuity element required for prescription.
Lana Lutz crossed a foot trail on Mark Muir's parcel each summer for decades exceeding living memory. Muir never objected or fenced the path during that span. Lutz claims a prescriptive easement and the court tests whether the duration satisfied the maxim's memory-exceeding requirement.
Owen Ortiz used a shortcut across Nora Nash's meadow for more than a generation without permission. Nash took no action to stop the use throughout the long period. Ortiz seeks to establish an easement and the court applies the maxim to decide if memory-exceeding duration plus adversity suffices.
Lars Lindstrom used a footpath across Lexicon Media's land for the full prescriptive period. After Lars conveyed his parcel to Lotus Pharmaceuticals, the company continued the identical use. The court decides whether the prescriptive easement benefit passes to the successor in interest.
Peter Pratt grazed cattle on a meadow owned by Quinn Quick for a period longer than any living person recalled. Quick never posted signs or brought suit during those decades. Pratt asserts a prescriptive right and the court checks whether the maxim's long-use element is met.
Rita Ruiz drove daily over an old lane on Sam Soto's acreage for a span exceeding human memory. Soto erected no gate and voiced no objection across that entire time. Ruiz sues to confirm an easement and the court weighs whether the maxim supplies the required prescriptive foundation.
Dennis Burnham married Francie Burnham in 1976 in West Virginia. In 1977 the couple moved to New Jersey, where their two children were born. In July 1987 the Burnhams separated. Mrs. Burnham, who intended to move to California, was visiting her parents in that State when she filed for divorce in New Jersey on grounds of extreme cruelty, seeking spousal and child support, custody of the children, and possession of the family home. In early August 1987 petitioner visited Mrs. Burnham in California to discuss the children and the separation. He took the children to San Francisco for a few days. Upon returning the children to Mrs. Burnham, petitioner was served with a summons and complaint for divorce filed in California Superior Court that also sought custody of the children. After being served, petitioner returned to New Jersey. In January 1988 petitioner made a special appearance in the California action and moved to quash service of process on the ground that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. The Superior Court denied the motion, and the State Court of Appeal affirmed. The California Supreme Court denied review. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the state and federal courts.
The use must be adverse to the servient owner, open and notorious, and continuous and uninterrupted for the full prescriptive period fixed by local law. The maxim supplies the requirement that the period be long enough to exceed human memory, satisfying the durational element when the other conditions are met.
Supporting sources
…people of the same sex. Does it remove that issue from the political process? Of course not. It would be surprising to find a prescription regarding marriage in the Federal Constitution since, as the author of today’s opinion reminded us only two years ago (in an opinion joined by the same Justices who join him today):…
…"[T]he law of defamation has been an integral part of the laws of England, the colonies and the states since time immemorial. So many actions have been maintained and judgments recovered under the various laws of libel that the Constitutional validity of libel actions could be denied only by a Court willing to…
…the three patients died. Although the Court of Appeals considered the constitutionality of the statute "as applied to the prescription of life-ending medication for use by terminally ill, competent adult patients who wish to hasten their deaths," the court did not have before it any individual plaintiff seeking to hasten…
…with respect to voting' "); see also James Everard's Breweries v. Day , 265 U. S. 545 (1924) (upholding ban on medical prescription of intoxicating malt liquors as appropriate to enforce Eighteenth Amendment ban on manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes). It is also true,…
…the constitutionality of California's assertion of jurisdiction. Post, at 632. But our analysis today comports with that prescription, at least if we give it the only sense allowed by our precedents. The "contemporary notions of due process" applicable to personal jurisdiction are the enduring " traditional notions of…
Seasonal use satisfies continuity when it matches the ordinary pattern of use that a true owner would make of the property. For a lakefront cabin, summer swimming and picnicking on the disputed strip counts as continuous because that is how an owner would normally use such land.
Supporting sources
Yes. The benefit may accrue to the adverse user alone or to the adverse user and others who share interests in the dominant land. Successors in privity may also tack periods of use to complete the prescriptive period.
Supporting sources
The maxim operates as an independent basis for creation by prescription when the statutory formalities of a writing are absent. Prescription supplies an exception that allows an easement to arise from long adverse use even though no deed or recorded declaration exists.
Supporting sources