Reference no: EM132414282

The Herzogs owned property in a steep, hilly area. They had an easement that allowed them to use a road over neighboring properties, Parcels 2 and 3, for access to their property, Parcel 1.

Grosso bought Parcel 3 and soon afterward graded his portion of the road, dumping fill dirt across the Herzogs' access and putting up a gate that prevented them from using the road. Grosso eventually agreed to cut a new access road through the fill to Parcel 2, but he put the new road along a very steep, muddy bank; it was narrow and dangerous. Grosso refused to let the Herzogs put up a guardrail and reflectors on the edge of the steep bank and also prevented them from having the road paved.

When the Herzogs sued, the trial court ruled in their favor, ordering Grosso to remove the gate, to stop interfering with the Herzogs' right to use and improve the easement, and to pave the Herzogs' portion of the road. Grosso was also ordered to pay damages to the Herzogs. He appealed.

On appeal, should the court uphold the trial court's orders?