In Blalock v. Conzelman, 751 So. 2d 2 (Ala. 1999), the supreme court interpreted "an easement for ingress and egress to and from said property" as providing a nonexclusive easement. The court explained: "'A principle of concurrent, rather than exclusive, use underlies the law concerning easement.' McMahon v. Hines, 298 Ill. App. 3d 231, 239, 697 N.E.2d 1199, 1206, 232 Ill. Dec. 269, 276 (1998). 'Therefore, use of an easement by both [the dominant and the servient] landowners must be permitted in accordance with their individual interests.' Id. See also Fedorko Properties, Inc. v. C.F. Zurn & Assocs., 720 A.2d 147 (Pa. Super. 1998) (the mere use of the term 'exclusive easement' in an easement conveyance did not 'grant an easement exclusive of the servient estate'). Nothing in the deeds ... suggests the Conzelmans' easement was granted or reserved exclusively for them." 751 So. 2d at 6.