Van Klompenburg v. Berghold

In Van Klompenburg v. Berghold (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 345, the court held language in an easement expressly stating that a roadway was to be "kept open" and "wholly unobstructed" precluded owners of the servient estate from maintaining closed gates across the easement. (Van Klompenburg v. Berghold, supra, 126 Cal.App.4th at p. 350.) The court recognized that "'"unless it is expressly stipulated that the way shall be an open one, or it appears from the terms of the grant or the circumstances that such was the intention, the owner of the servient estate may erect gates across the way, if they are constructed so as not unreasonably to interfere with the right of passage."' However, 'where an easement under a grant is specific in its terms, "it is decisive of the limits of the easement."'" (Ibid.)