Fisher v. Carpenter
Decision Date | 04 February 1887 |
Parties | JOHN M. FISHER v. GEO. W. CARPENTER |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Error from Dickinson District Court.
ACTION brought by Carpenter against Fisher, to restrain the defendant from obstructing a certain so-called public street. Trial at the October Term, 1885, and judgment for plaintiff. The defendant brings the case here.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
C. F Mead, for plaintiff in error.
No brief has been filed or oral argument made in this case on the part of the defendant in error; hence we must rely principally upon the brief and oral argument made by the counsel for the plaintiff in error. It seems that the only question involved in this case is, whether a certain piece of land situated in the city of Abilene, Kansas, is a public street, or is the private property of the plaintiff in error John M. Fisher; and that it is either the one or the other, is admitted. That it is not a public street by prescription or limitation, is clear beyond all question, under the authority of the following cases: The State v. Horn, 35 Kan. 717; Smith v. Smith, 34 id. 293, 301. The only question then for us to further consider is, whether the land is a public street by dedication, or not. Now it is not such unless it is such by reason of the filing of a certain map or plat and the surveyor's notes and the proprietor's acknowledgment, in the office of the register of deeds, on July 22, 1870. Sections 1, 2 and 6 of the act relating to plats of towns and cities, (Comp. Laws of 1879, ch. 78,) read as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hoggard v. Mitchell
... ... Saulet v. City of New ... Orleans, 10 La. Ann. 81, square with nothing to ... distinguish limit from streets. See, also, Fisher v ... Carpenter, 36 Kan. 184, 12 P. 941; City of Covington ... v. McDonald, 94 Ky. 1, 21 S.W. 235 ... In ... Hurley v ... ...
-
City of California v. Burke
...238 Ill. 305; Princeton v. Templeton, 71 Ill. 68; Coe College v. Cedar Rapids, 95 N.W. 267; Birge v. Centralia, 218 Ill. 503; Fisher v. Carpenter, 36 Kan. 184; McLaughlin v. Stevens, 18 Ohio 94; Hurley v. Rum River Co., 34 Minn. 143; Duluth v. Railway, 49 Minn. 201. (4) Where the city lays ......
-
City of Dallas v. Leake
...288 S.W. 812; Steinaur v. City of Tell City, 146 Ind. 490, 45 N.E. 1056; Earle v. McCarty, Fla., 70 So.2d 314; Fisher v. Carpenter, 36 Kan. 184, 12 P. 941. Appellant cites us the cases of Kimball v. City of Chicago, 253 Ill. 105, 97 N.E. 257, and Ingraham v. Brown, 231 Ill. 256, 83 N.E. 156......
-
Buschmann v. The City of St. Louis
... ... the face of the plat, is unnamed, and appears only as an ... outlying piece, the same as the rolling mills and the ... reservoir property. Fisher v. Carpenter, 36 Kan ... 184; Mayor v. Stuyvesant, 17 N.Y. 34; Cook v ... Village, etc., 7 Michigan, 115; Robinson v ... Coffin, 6 P. 41. (2) ... ...