The Appeals Court upheld a Land Court order requiring a neighbor to remove surveillance cameras and speed bumps from a shared driveway, because they materially interfered with the other family’s deeded right of way. If you have an easement over a neighbor’s land, the owner may not use that land in ways that materially interfere with your use of it. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
Two neighboring homes in Westfield share a long driveway that sits entirely on one owner’s land. The other family’s deed gives them an express easement over the driveway to reach the street, by vehicle or otherwise. After a dispute between the neighbors in 2020, the owner of the driveway land installed surveillance cameras, with at least four pointed directly at the driveway. In 2021 he added four speed bumps about fifty feet apart. The family with the easement testified that the cameras made them so uncomfortable that they used the driveway less and asked to move a child’s bus stop, and that one of their cars could not get over the bumps.
What the court decided
In Greany v. Tersavich, No. 25-P-68 (Mass. App. Ct. June 29, 2026) (Rule 23.0 decision), the Appeals Court affirmed the Land Court judgment for the easement holders.
The court started with a basic rule. The owner of land burdened by an easement may use the land in ways that are consistent with the easement, but not in ways that are inconsistent with it. Highland Club of W. Roxbury v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 327 Mass. 711 (1951). Courts weigh slight inconvenience to the easement holder against the owner’s freedom to use the land reasonably, and ask whether the interference is so slight as to be reasonable in all the circumstances. Yagjian v. O’Brien, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 733 (1985). The owner may not use the land in a way that materially increases the inconvenience of using the easement. Texon, Inc. v. Holyoke Mach. Co., 8 Mass. App. Ct. 363 (1979).
On the cameras, the trial judge did not believe the owner’s claim that they were for security. Together with hostile signs he posted along the driveway, the judge found the cameras were put up to intimidate the neighbors so they would use the driveway less. The owner argued that nothing physically stopped the family from driving, and that they kept using the driveway. The Appeals Court rejected that. The cameras interfered by subjecting the family to constant surveillance, and the family in fact cut back their use. The judge’s mention of privacy described the interference; it was not a separate privacy claim.
On the speed bumps, the owner himself testified that part of the goal was to cut down the number of cars using the driveway. The judge found the bumps were meant to deter the neighbors and their visitors, and the family could not drive one of their cars over them. That supported a finding of material interference, and the Appeals Court affirmed the removal order.
The court held the removal order was not too broad. It covered only cameras along the driveway or pointed at the neighbors’ property, not cameras aimed at the owner’s own door or yard. The trial judge also left room for the neighbors to agree on speed bumps of an agreed type, size and number. Finally, the owner’s claim for reimbursement of a water pipe repair under the shared maintenance agreement failed for lack of proof of what work was done and whether it was a shared cost.
What this means for you
An easement is a real property right. If your deed gives you a right of way over a neighbor’s driveway, the neighbor still owns the land and can use it. But the neighbor cannot use it to wear you down. Interference does not have to be a locked gate. Cameras aimed at your comings and goings, obstacles your car cannot get over, and similar steps can be material interference when they make the easement harder to use.
Motive matters. In this case the judge relied on the hostile signs and the owner’s own words about cutting down traffic. A neighbor who offers a safety reason will have a harder time if the evidence shows the real aim was to discourage you.
Easement holders do not get everything, though. The order did not ban all speed bumps or reach cameras aimed at the owner’s own home.
What to do now
- Get a copy of your deed and any recorded easement or maintenance agreement from the Registry of Deeds. Read exactly what rights it gives you.
- Write down each change your neighbor makes to the shared way, with dates and photos.
- Keep a record of how the change affects you, such as trips you skip, vehicles that cannot pass, or deliveries that stop coming.
- Save copies of any signs, texts, or messages that show why the neighbor made the change.
- Talk to a lawyer before you remove anything yourself.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. These cases move on short deadlines.
