Comm'rs of Coppey County v. Venard
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Lyon District Court. On the 22d of May 1871, a petition was duly presented to the Board of Coxmty Commissioners of the Coxmty of Coffey„ signed by the requisite number of qualified petitioners, praying that a certain portion of a county road, as established by the final order of the county board on the 8th of October 1867, be vacated.
Read the full summary
Error from Lyon District Court. On the 22d of May 1871, a petition was duly presented to the Board of Coxmty Commissioners of the Coxmty of Coffey„ signed by the requisite number of qualified petitioners, praying that a certain portion of a county road, as established by the final order of the county board on the 8th of October 1867, be vacated. This petition was duly acted upon, due notice of hearing given, viewers duly appointed, the road duly viewed and reported upon, and at a regular session of said county board, held July 5th, 1871, among other proceedings in relation thereto the record…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Valentine, J.:
The main question in this case, and the only one which we think it is necessary to consider, is, whether a county, when the commissioners thereof vacate a county road, is liable in damages to any person who may sustain some loss in consequence thereof. We think a county is not so liable. There is no statute that makes it liable, and we know of no principle of the common law that would create such liability. The county through its officers has an undoubted legal right to vacate county roads. (Ch. 89, Gen. Stat., 897, et seq.) And neither…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Rowe v. JamesWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Anderson v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
- Sample v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1921
- Holmquist v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
- Randall v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.