Mountain Property Owner Wins Key Ruling on
Public Access
A Las Vegas radio tower entrepreneur who
posted key sections of trails in the Santa Monica
Mountains with signs demanding that hikers “get the
hell off our land and don’t come back” has won an
important decision from the California Court of
Appeals.
His attorney said the ruling will prevent
agencies like the California Coastal Commission from
forcing landowners to allow public access to trails across
private land or roads that, while traditionally open for
general use, have never been formally deeded over by
landowners.
“It’s a very basic right that
has been affirmed here, to keep people off of your
property,” said Encino attorney Fred Gaines who
represented James Kay Jr., the owner of Castro Peak. The court
opinion was released Tuesday by a three-member panel of
state judges in Santa Ana.
Kay’s company, LT-WR, LLC, won a
decision that a California property owner has the right to
prevent others from crossing his or her land on what
traditionally were held to be undeeded public trails. Common
law allows someone to acquire a so-called “prescriptive
easement” by openly using a trail for a set period
of time, but Kay’s lawyer said the ruling requires
easement claims to be proved in court.
The commission’s arguments were part
of an effort by it and the National Park Service to maintain
access to Castro Peak, a 2800-foot high promontory on the Santa
Monica Mountains backbone above Latigo Canyon Road, east of
Kanan-Dume Road.
The appellate court held that
“inherent in one’s ownership of real property is
the right to exclude uninvited visitors,” and ruled
that fences and signs aimed at preserving the company’s
ownership of the land must be allowed.
The Coastal Commission had argued that the
signs would prevent people from using the trails and acquiring
what are known as prescriptive rights to use the routes, which
are basically the legal right to walk or drive across someone
else’s land.
Enforcing such rights is an important
tool for government agencies that are seeking to acquire access
routes to beaches or scenic sites across private property owned
by persons who might be forced to give up legal rights as they
seek rezoning or building permits.
The trails at issue in this case had been
used by hikers for years before Kay bought Castro Peak in 2002
and fenced it off. The commission argued that fences and signs
might preclude the gaining of rights to cross the land in the
future.
“If those people are going to
try to claim a prescriptive right to that land, they are going
to have to go to court and establish those rights,”
Gaines said.
“It’s a very basic right, to be
able to exclude people from your own land,” he said.
The ruling also held that Kay’s
company was allowed to keep a mobile home on graded roads
on the property.
Gaines said the caretaker on the property
has been bothered by people knocking on his door seeking help,
and that some small fires have been set by trespassers.
“It’s private property that is
surrounded by public land, and if the public agencies want a
trail there, they can either buy the land from my client or
construct a trail around it,” Gaines said.
Spokespersons for the Coastal Commission
and other recreation agencies could not be reached for comment.
The Los Angeles Times, in a 2004 report
about Kay, said he had sued 23 of his neighbors for their
reported refusal to grant him a prescriptive easement on the
access road to Castro Peak. The federal government was also
investigating whether Kay had mistakenly built his mountaintop
radio relay facility on federal land at Castro Peak.
Gaines said Kay “is pleased with the
decision.”
