Access disputes often begin with a practical problem: a neighbor installs a gate, rope, fence, or boulder across a driveway, alley, or passage that someone has used for years. The legal question is more complicated. Does the long-standing use create a right to continue using the property, or can the owner lawfully close it?

In Klingert v. Lee, No. ED113803 (Mo. App. E.D. July 21, 2026), the Missouri Court of Appeals clarified an important part of Missouri prescriptive-easement law. A person's mistaken belief that a route is public does not necessarily defeat a claim to a private prescriptive easement. Courts must also examine how that person actually used the property and whether the use was distinct from the general public's use.

For Missouri property owners and businesses, the decision shows why the history and purpose of access can determine whether valuable property rights exist.

What Is a Prescriptive Easement in Missouri?

A prescriptive easement is a limited right to use someone else's land that may arise from use over time. It does not transfer ownership of the property. Instead, it may establish a right to use the land for a particular purpose, such as reaching a residence, receiving commercial deliveries, or using a driveway.

Under Missouri law, a person claiming a prescriptive easement generally must prove that the use was:

1.      continuous;

2.      uninterrupted;

3.      visible;

4.      adverse; and

5.      maintained for at least ten years.

“Adverse” does not necessarily mean hostile, confrontational, or made with an intent to take another person's property. The key question is whether the claimant used the property without recognizing the owner's authority to permit or prohibit that use. Long-term use of another's land is generally presumed adverse, but evidence of permission may rebut that presumption.

The Access Dispute in Klingert v. Lee

Louis Klingert operated an appliance store in downtown New Haven, Missouri. Behind the store was a loading dock. A passage between two neighboring buildings connected Main Street to the alley behind the store and provided large delivery trucks access to that loading dock.

Klingert testified that he had used the passage since 2000 to receive appliance deliveries. The neighboring owners purchased their property in 2016 and later blocked the passage, first with a rope and then with boulders. Klingert claimed a prescriptive easement.

The trial court denied his claim because Klingert testified that he believed the passage was public access. In the trial court's view, that belief prevented him from claiming an individual, private right to use it.

The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed and sent the case back. Importantly, it did not declare that Klingert had established an easement. The trial court must consider his individualized use and the remaining elements of the claim.

A Route Can Be Used by the Public and Still Support a Private Easement Claim

The central issue was the difference between exclusivity and individualized use.

A person claiming an easement does not have to prove that no one else used the property. Unlike an adverse-possession claimant, an easement claimant is not asserting ownership of the land or a right to exclude everyone else. Multiple people—including the property owner—may use the same route.

But a claimant seeking a private easement must show a use distinct from the public's general use. If the claimant merely used a roadway as a public shortcut in the same way as everyone else, while believing it was public, that use ordinarily does not establish a private right.

Klingert presented evidence of something more specific. He used the passage for truck access to his loading dock, parking, and events. He testified that it was the only route by which an 18-wheeler could reach the dock. That could distinguish his business use from the public's ordinary use.

The appellate court held that the trial court could not disregard this evidence merely because Klingert believed the route was public. The character of the use—not the claimant's belief standing alone—must be examined. 

What Evidence Helps Prove a Missouri Prescriptive Easement?

If access to your home, farm, rental property, or business is threatened, useful evidence may include:

·         dated photographs, surveys, maps, and aerial images showing the route;

·         delivery records, invoices, or service logs demonstrating recurring use;

·         testimony from prior owners, neighbors, employees, delivery drivers, or customers;

·         evidence showing why the route is necessary and how your use differs from public use;

·         communications about permission, objections, maintenance, or barriers; and

·         documents establishing when the use began and whether it continued for at least ten years.

Frequent use alone does not resolve the issue. Its duration, purpose, visibility, interruptions, and surrounding circumstances all matter.

Permission Can Change the Legal Analysis

For a person using someone else's property, asking permission may seem neighborly and prudent. Legally, however, permissive use generally is not adverse use. A license or informal agreement may protect access temporarily while undermining a later claim that an easement arose by prescription.

For the landowner, ignoring another person's use for many years may allow a claim to develop. A written license stating that use is permissive and revocable may help prevent misunderstandings, although the appropriate response depends on the circumstances.

Neither side should send a permission letter, erect a barrier, remove a gate, or interrupt an established access route without first evaluating the potential consequences. Self-help can intensify the dispute and may affect both the evidence and available remedies.

Private and Public Easements Must Be Pleaded Correctly

Klingert also contains a procedural warning. Klingert alternatively argued that the evidence supported a public prescriptive easement, but his petition sought an easement owned by him individually. The appellate court declined to review a public-easement theory that had not been properly presented and decided in the trial court.

A private easement benefits a particular person or parcel. A public prescriptive easement involves rights held through an appropriate governmental entity, not simply the public as an unorganized group. Identifying the correct theory, parties, and relief at the outset can be critical.

What Should You Do When Property Access Is Blocked?

Act promptly, but avoid escalating the situation before obtaining legal advice. Preserve photographs and communications, identify witnesses, locate deeds and surveys, and document exactly how the route has been used. If access is essential to business operations, emergency services, a residence, or ongoing construction, immediate court relief may need to be considered.

Missouri prescriptive-easement disputes often turn on decades of history and subtle differences between public, permissive, and individualized use. Early legal analysis can help preserve evidence, clarify the strength of a claim or defense, and identify practical options before positions harden.

If a neighbor has blocked a long-used driveway, alley, road, or commercial access point—or if someone is asserting a right to cross your property—contact our firm to discuss your rights under Missouri law.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.