By Xenom 
The recent Montecito Country Club easement dispute has sent shockwaves through California’s luxury real estate community. As someone who specializes in property law cases in Santa Barbara County, I’ve watched this unfold with particular interest.
Quick Case Summary
Bottom line up front: In July 2024, property owners Kevin and Jeannee Root lost their legal battle against the Montecito Country Club after installing landscaping on a club-owned easement without permission. The court ordered complete removal and restoration at the Roots’ expense, establishing a precedent that will impact property rights cases throughout Southern California.
This legal battle offers crucial warnings for anyone who owns property near golf courses, country clubs, or other shared boundaries in coastal California communities. Let me walk you through what happened and why it matters to you.
Inside the Landmark Montecito Easement Case
In July 2024, the Santa Barbara Superior Court delivered a definitive ruling in the Montecito Country Club easement dispute against adjacent property owners Kevin and Jeannee Root.
Court records show that Judge Donna Geck issued a mandatory injunction requiring the Roots to remove landscaping they had installed on an easement owned by the club and restore the property to its original condition—entirely at their own expense.
What makes this case particularly notable is that the court retained jurisdiction to monitor compliance until completion. This level of oversight highlights the seriousness with which the court viewed this property rights violation in the upscale Santa Barbara enclave.
Understanding the Dispute: What Exactly Happened?
The conflict began when the Roots undertook substantial landscaping on an area where the Montecito Country Club held a legal easement:
- They removed an existing hedgerow
- Installed a new hedge along the property line
- Constructed a retaining wall
- Imported soil to regrade the area
- Added extensive new landscaping
The problem? They never received permission from Ty Warner, the billionaire owner of the Montecito Country Club, who maintained exclusive authority over any alterations to the easement.
According to court documents filed under Case No. 21CV02227, the easement was specifically reserved for potential future use as a cart path or for groundskeeper access—uses that would be impossible with the Roots’ unauthorized modifications.
The Legal Arguments That Won the Case
The legal team from Cappello & Noël LLP presented three compelling arguments that ultimately convinced the court:
- Lack of proper authorization: The Roots failed to obtain permission from Ty Warner, the only person with authority to approve modifications.
- Interference with intended use: The new landscaping effectively prevented the club from utilizing the easement for its designated purposes.
- Prior notification: Evidence showed that Warner and management had explicitly informed the Roots they were not permitted to alter or build on the easement.
This wasn’t a sudden legal action either. Court records revealed a “Demurrer” filed back in May 2022 concerning a recorded easement from 1977, indicating this dispute had been brewing for years in the exclusive Montecito neighborhood.
Historical Context: The Montecito Club’s Evolving Property Rights
To fully understand this case, we need to examine the Montecito Country Club’s history:
- Originally established around 1918
- Renamed from Santa Barbara Country Club in 1922
- Underwent significant financial challenges in its early years
- Experienced major renovation in 2019 under Ty Warner’s ownership
- Now features a Jack Nicklaus Signature golf course
This extensive renovation, reportedly costing $119.5 million, likely increased the club’s determination to protect its property rights and future development options in the prime coastal real estate area.
A Pattern of Easement Disputes in Affluent Communities
The Montecito Country Club easement dispute isn’t an isolated incident. The Santa Barbara and Montecito areas have seen numerous similar cases that establish a clear pattern.
In 2009, another landmark case, Valley Club of Montecito v. Klein, resulted in the Valley Club successfully claiming adverse possession over portions of adjacent property owner Theodore Klein’s land.
Remarkably similar to the recent case, that dispute also involved:
- A golf tee area
- Boundary hedges
- A cart path
The court ruled in favor of the Valley Club based on adverse possession, setting a precedent that likely influenced the recent Montecito Country Club ruling.
Other Notable Santa Barbara Area Easement Cases
The coastal communities have seen several other significant easement disputes:
Zacky v. Dillon: This Montecito case involved a nonexclusive “driveway purposes” easement between neighboring properties. The court had to clarify precise terms of the judgment concerning reserved and prescriptive easements, showing how even seemingly simple access arrangements can become legally complex.
Santa Barbara County Road Encroachment: The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Santa Barbara County in a Montecito road encroachment lawsuit, emphasizing the county’s authority to enforce laws against unpermitted encroachments on public rights-of-way.
McMenemy Trail Realignment Dispute: A controversy arose regarding the proposed realignment of this popular Montecito hiking trail. The dispute stemmed from a neighbor’s concerns about trail encroachment on their property, showcasing how public access easements can become contentious in residential areas.
Beyond Easements: The Broader Legal Landscape
The Montecito Country Club has faced other legal challenges that paint a complete picture of property disputes in this exclusive community.
Most notably, former Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo sued the club over noise from its newly constructed Sports Complex. The Santa Barbara City Planning Commission eventually intervened, mandating a 120-day noise monitoring plan.
This illustrates how country clubs and their neighbours often clash over various aspects of property use in the Santa Barbara coastal region, from easements to noise pollution.
The Montecito area has also seen:
- Multiple road encroachment lawsuits with Santa Barbara County
- Trail realignment controversies due to property encroachment concerns
- Disputes over public beach access rights along coastline roads
- A massive $70 million settlement involving pipeline easements affecting multiple California Central Coast properties
Legal Implications for Santa Barbara Property Owners
The Montecito Country Club easement dispute offers several crucial lessons for property owners in Montecito, Santa Barbara, and similar coastal communities:
- Easement rights trump aesthetic preferences: No matter how beautiful your landscaping plans, they cannot interfere with valid easement rights.
- Permission is non-negotiable: Even when an easement appears dormant or unused, you must obtain explicit permission before making any alterations.
- Courts will enforce full restoration: The financial burden of removing unauthorized changes and restoring original conditions falls entirely on the property owner.
- Legal fees can be substantial: Beyond restoration costs, losing parties typically face significant legal expenses in these California property disputes.
This case demonstrates that Santa Barbara courts take a strict approach to enforcing easement rights, particularly in high-value property areas like Montecito and Hope Ranch.
Expert Advice: Protecting Yourself from Easement Disputes
As someone who studies these Santa Barbara property cases closely, I recommend these essential steps for any property owner:
Before purchasing property in coastal California:
- Request a comprehensive title search identifying all easements
- Physically inspect the property with easements in mind
- Ask direct questions about any shared access or utility areas
- Research previous disputes involving neighboring properties
If you already own property in Montecito or nearby areas:
- Review your deed and property records for easement details
- Consult with a Santa Barbara property lawyer to understand the specific limitations
- Document the current state of any easement areas with photographs
- Maintain open communication with easement holders
Before making any changes to Santa Barbara coastal properties:
- Obtain written permission from all easement holders
- Consider having a formal amendment drafted by a local lawyer
- Get necessary permits from Santa Barbara County building authorities
- Keep detailed records of all communications and agreements
These steps can save you thousands in potential legal and restoration costs, especially in high-value communities like Montecito.
- Also Read: Brandon Aiyuk Rams Sideline Scuffle.
Understanding Different Types of Easements in California
The Montecito Country Club easement dispute involved a specific type of easement, but there are several you should be aware of in California property law:
Express Easements: Created through written documents like deeds or contracts. These are the most common and clearly defined in California property law.
Implied Easements: Arise from the circumstances of property division or historical use patterns. California courts recognize these based on reasonable necessity and original ownership.
Prescriptive Easements: Obtained through continuous, open use of another’s property for a statutory period (5 years in California). These are particularly common in older communities like Montecito.
Easements by Necessity: Created when one property would be landlocked without access across another. California law strongly protects access rights.
Conservation Easements: Increasingly common in Santa Barbara County, these protect natural resources by limiting development rights.
Knowing which type applies to your situation is crucial for understanding your rights and limitations under California property law.
FAQs About Santa Barbara Easement Disputes
How do I know if my Montecito property has an easement on it?
Easements should be listed on your property deed or title report. You can also check Santa Barbara County land records or hire a local property lawyer to conduct a thorough search.
Can I build a fence or plant trees on an easement in California?
Generally, you cannot build permanent structures or plant large trees on easements if they would interfere with the easement holder’s rights. Always seek permission first, especially in areas like Montecito with strict enforcement.
Do Santa Barbara County easements expire or can they be terminated?
Some easements can expire under specific conditions, but many are permanent and “run with the land,” transferring automatically when property ownership changes. Termination usually requires mutual agreement documented in writing and properly recorded with Santa Barbara County.
What if the easement holder never uses their easement on my Montecito property?
Non-use does not typically terminate an easement under California law. As seen in the Montecito Country Club easement dispute, even easements reserved for “future use” remain legally enforceable.
Can I negotiate modifications to an existing easement on my Santa Barbara property?
Yes, easement terms can sometimes be modified if both parties agree, but any changes must be properly documented and recorded with Santa Barbara County to be legally binding.
What happens if I unknowingly violate an easement in California?
Ignorance of an easement’s existence does not protect you from legal consequences under California law. You may still be required to remove structures and restore the property at your expense, as demonstrated in the Montecito Country Club case.
The Bottom Line for Coastal California Property Owners
The Montecito Country Club easement dispute serves as a powerful reminder that property rights are complex and strictly enforced in Santa Barbara County and throughout coastal California.
Understanding the easements that affect your property isn’t just legal paperwork—it’s essential protection for one of your most valuable investments. What might seem like a minor landscaping decision today could result in costly legal battles tomorrow, especially in prestigious communities like Montecito.
For anyone living near a golf course, country club, or in communities with shared facilities along the California coast, the lessons from this case are particularly relevant. Always verify, always get permission, and when in doubt, consult a qualified Santa Barbara property lawyer.
This Montecito Country Club easement dispute will likely influence how similar cases are handled for years to come, making it essential reading for property owners across Santa Barbara County and beyond.