## Facts

- Alexandro and Velma Pacheco acquired adjoining lots in Santa Fe in 1944; their home sat partly on each lot and initially used a septic system on one lot.
- In 1950, the city required abandonment of the septic system and connection to a newly installed municipal sewer main along the street abutting one of the lots.
- The Pachecos installed a sewer line from their home across the lot later conveyed to connect to the sewer main; no alternative connection route was shown, and there was no sewer main along the other street at the time.
- In 1951, the Pachecos built a second house on the lot crossed by the sewer line and connected it to the same line.
- In 1953, the Pachecos sold the second-house parcel without an express easement reservation; Mr. Pacheco testified he informed the buyer that the sewer line served his retained home.
- After intervening transfers, Severo and Irene Otero purchased the second-house parcel in 1965; they testified they did not learn until 1974 that the sewer line also served the Pachecos’ home.
- The Oteros alleged repeated sewer backups causing damage and also asserted claims based on paying ad valorem taxes owed by the Pachecos.
- The Pachecos counterclaimed, asserting an easement over the Oteros’ parcel for the sewer line serving the Pachecos’ retained home.

## Issues

1. Whether the Pachecos retained an easement by implied reservation over the conveyed parcel for the sewer line serving their retained property despite no express reservation in the deed.
2. Whether the Oteros qualified as bona fide purchasers without notice, or were charged with inquiry/constructive notice of the sewer-line easement.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the judgment recognizing an easement in favor of the Pachecos over the Oteros’ property for maintenance and use of the sewer line.
- The court held the elements for an easement by implied reservation were satisfied, including reasonable necessity at the time of severance.
- The court held the Oteros were charged with inquiry notice under the circumstances and therefore could not take free of the easement as bona fide purchasers without notice.
- The portion of the trial court’s judgment awarding the Oteros relief on the tax-payment claim was not at issue on appeal.

## Legal Principles

- An easement by implied reservation may arise upon severance of commonly owned property when, before severance, there was a preexisting, continuous use benefiting the retained land and burdening the conveyed land, and the use is reasonably necessary for enjoyment of the retained land.
- For implied reservation, “reasonable necessity” may suffice; strict or absolute necessity is not required where the facts show the retained parcel reasonably depends on the continued use at the time of conveyance.
- “Apparent” use for implied-easement purposes is not limited to physical visibility of the utility line; surrounding circumstances and observable features may make the existence of an underground servitude reasonably discoverable.
- A purchaser is charged with notice of matters that a reasonably prudent buyer would discover through appropriate inquiry; inquiry notice can defeat bona fide purchaser protection even when the servitude is unrecorded and the infrastructure is underground.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed an impliedly reserved easement for an underground sewer line serving the grantors’ retained home, concluding the connection was reasonably necessary at severance and that the purchasers were on inquiry notice based on the circumstances, despite the lack of an express reservation or recorded easement.


Otero v. Pacheco, 612 P.2d 1335 (N.M. Ct. App. 1980)