Proctor v. Town of Lewiston
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action by appellee against appellant for obstructing a road, commenced before a justice of the peace, and after-wards carried by appeal to the Fulton Circuit Court. The defendant denied that the road obstructed, which crossed his land, was a public highway, or that he had dedicated it to the public, and offered evidence tending to show that he had never designed to give the land for a road, but had claimed it as its owner, and had demanded rent for its use.
Read the full summary
This was an action by appellee against appellant for obstructing a road, commenced before a justice of the peace, and after-wards carried by appeal to the Fulton Circuit Court. The defendant denied that the road obstructed, which crossed his land, was a public highway, or that he had dedicated it to the public, and offered evidence tending to show that he had never designed to give the land for a road, but had claimed it as its owner, and had demanded rent for its use. This evidence was excluded, and an appeal taken to this court.
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, C. J.
It did not conclusively follow, because the defendant, when he fenced his land, left out a strip of the width convenient for a road, that he designed to dedicate it to the public for that purpose. The fact of dedication depended entirely upon the intention of the party who is alleged to have made it. If at the time he fenced out this strip of land, he designed it for a road for the use of the public, and the dedication was accepted by the public before his retraction, he could not subsequently change his purpose, and resume the grant. It was the right of the defendant to have his…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Moose v. . CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Wilder v. City of Saint PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
- Quinn v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Buchanan v. CurtisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869
- Welch v. LouisIllinois Supreme Court · 1863
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.