Snow v. Town of Sandgate

• Decision Date: 16 July 1894
• Citation: 66 Vt. 451,29 A. 673
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court
• Parties: SNOW et al. v. TOWN OF SANDGATE.

29 A. 673

66 Vt. 451

SNOW et al.

v. TOWN OF SANDGATE.

Supreme Court of Vermont. Bennington.

July 16, 1894.

Exceptions from Bennington county court; Ross, Chief Judge.

Petition by Clark Snow and others to the town of Sandgate to lay out a road. Petition dismissed. Affirmed.

The petitioner Clark Snow was the owner of a farm, upon which he resided, in the town of Sandgate, and was also the owner of another lot in that town, upon Moffet mountain, which was known as the "Mountain Lot." A highway ran by the home farm, and another highway ran through the mountain lot, intersecting the first-mentioned highway, so that communication could be had between the mountain lot and the home farm by means of these two highways. The distance, however, was nearly a mile and a half by this route, and the road running through the mountain lot was so steep and rocky as to be almost impassable. The mountain lot was separated from the home farm by a strip of land 40 rods wide, owned by one Moses Flower, and, by the laying of a road across this 40-rod strip, convenient access could be had from the mountain lot to the home farm. In 1878 the selectmen of the town of Sandgate, upon due petition, had laid out a pent road across this strip, connecting the mountain lot with the home farm, upon condition that the petitioner Snow should pay the damage incident thereto, and should file a bond conditioned to save the town harmless at all times from any damage arising from the laying out and the maintenance of such road. At that time, Snow did pay the damage, and did file such a bond, and had saved the town harmless from all damage in respect to said pent road up to January, 1892, at which time the said road, upon a petition for that purpose, was discontinued by the selectmen. Thereupon, a petition was preferred for the relaying of said road. The commissioners laid the road as prayed for. With reference to it, they reported that said pent road "begins and ends on the private lands of Clark Snow; that it neither begins nor ends nor intersects with any public highway nor pent road; that it is not accessible to any person or persons other than said Snow, without trespassing upon the lands of said Snow; and that neither the public good, nor the necessities or convenience of individuals other than said Snow, required the laying out of said road."

H. K. Fowler and W. B. Sheldon, for petitioners. O. M. Barber, for defendant.

ROWELL, J. The state is not authorized to take private property...