Wooley v. Rochester
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, on the statute of highways, for damage happening to a traveller December 16, 1878. The plaintiff offered to show that the way was laid out, birilt, and dedicated to the public in 1862 by the owners of the land over which it passed; that at a legal town-meeting, March 10, 1863, due notice having been given by an article in the warrant, the town voted to accept the road, and ever since that time the town has kept it in repair, and used and treated it as a public highway.
1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.
There is no offer to prove the facts of an estoppel. The plaintiff does not propose to show that she acted upon, was induced to change her position by, or had any knowledge of, the vote of the town, or the repair of the road by the town, or that she would not have been in the road if she had not been led into an erroneous belief of its legal character by some untruthful statement or deceptive action of the town. And her knowledge of the vote and repairs would not have suspended the operation of the statute which prohibits that method of establishing a highway. The action cannot be 'sustained…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tilton v. PittsfieldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1878