Olson v. McRae
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
DIMOND, Justice.
In answer to special interrogatories, a jury found that appellants had dedicated for public use a right of way across their lands. Appellants contend that they were entitled to judgment because evidence of their intent to dedicate a right of way was insufficient to justify submitting the case to the jury.
In Hamerly v. Denton 1 we said that there is a dedication when the owner of an interest in land transfers- to the public a privilege of use of such interest for a public purpose, and that the intention of the land owner to dedicate must be clearly and unequivocally manifested…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- City of Fairbanks v. SchaibleAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
- Ahlstrom v. CummingsAlaska Supreme Court · 1964
- DeArmond v. Alaska State Development CorporationAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
- Hamerly v. DentonAlaska Supreme Court · 1961
- State v. SchifskySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- City of Whittier v. Whittier Fuel & Marine Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 1978
- Demoski v. NewAlaska Supreme Court · 1987
- Preferred General Agency of Alaska, Inc. v. RaffettoAlaska Supreme Court · 1964
- Sloan v. Atlantic Richfield CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
- Otis Elevator Company v. McLaneyAlaska Supreme Court · 1965
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.