EASEMENT. All aequired right of use or enjoyment in the lands of another. which one may have by virtue of his ownership or posses sion of other land. Though limited in number, are of VeTV frequent occurrence. and comprehend such well-knONN 11 rights as rights of way, of light. of drainage. and the like. They to that large class of rights, falling short of ownership, in the lands of others ( jurn in re filittot). which, from the point of view of the land subjected to the use. are sometimes called servitudes. The Boman law distinguished two classes of servitudes. urban and rural, and de veloped a relined and highly elaborated body of rules to determine the conflicting rights of the owner of the burdened land and of the person entitled to the use thereof. I See In the common-law classification of property rights. easements belong to the class of incorporeal so called beeause of the impal pable diameter of the rights referred to, as distinguished from the direct ownership of the hind itself. and because, like other real property rights, they are inheritable with the lands to which they are appurtenant. They are limited in our s;stein to real property, though the Roman law recognized servitudes in ellattels, or movables. as well as immovables.
Though sometimes improperly used so as to include several varieties of rights in ulleno solo.
the easement proper is to be sharply distin guished: ( I) from rights not acquired, but M h ich flow directly from. and inhere in, the ownership of land, as the right to the uninterrupted flow of water in a water course, the right to the support of land in its natural state, etc., which are properly denominated natural riyhIs ; (•) from which do not consist in mere use, but which extend to the taking of something of value from another's land, as the right of pas turing cattle thereon, the right to mine coal or other minerals therein. and the like, which are known as pro/ifs a prendre, or, mole briefly, as profits: (3) from rights of use which attach to a person as an individual and not as a prop erty-owner, and Which are commonly spoken of as easements in gross as distinguished from .?asements appurtenant, but are, strictly speaking, only licenses to use the land of an other: and (.t) from rights of use which per
tain to one as a member of the public., such as the right to use a highway on another's land or to use a private stream for purposes of navi gation, and which are sometimes improperly called public easements. See NATURAL LAW : PROFIT: and LICENSE.
As thus limited and defined, the term ease ment describes only such a right of use as is appurtenant to a specific parcel of land to whose value and enjoyment it contributes. The right is, in fact, •onceived of as belonging to the land, rather than to the owner thereof for the time being, and as burdening the land over which it may be exercised, and not the person having the actual possession thereof. Accordingly, the estate to which the right attaches is known as the dominant tenement, and the estate subject to the servitude as the servient tenement. It follows. also. that the easement is unaffected by any disposition which may be made of either estate. The servient estate is subject to it. into whosesoever hand: it may come, and the right of use passes with the dominant tenement, that is conveyed. It was formerly considered that it was necessary to make some ref erence to the incorporeal rights attaching to au (state, at the time of conveying it. in order that these might pass with it to the grantee. and hence the use of the phrase 'with the appurte nances' in modern deeds: but it has long been settled that these or any other apt words are wholly unnecessary to produce that effect.
Easements are classified at common law as poNif ire (or affirmative) and negafitw, the for mer having reference to such as involved the physieal use of another's land by going upon it or otherwise, as a right of way or of drain age: while the latter, as in the right to light or to the support of a party-wall. calls for no -rad' physical eneroachm•nt. While convenient for some purposes, this distinction is superficial. and has no real signilieanee, the duty of the owner of the servient tenement being in all ea,es purely negative—to refrain from so using his land as to interfere with the rights of the dominant tenement—and involving no obligation to repair or do any other affirmative act.