Swift v. Mayor, etc., of Lithonia
Decision Date | 09 July 1897 |
Citation | 29 S.E. 12,101 Ga. 706 |
Parties | SWIFT et al. v. MAYOR, ETC., OF LITHONIA. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Where a dedication of his property to a public use is relied upon to defeat the claim of one holding the legal title, the acts relied upon to establish such dedication must be such as clearly showed a purpose on the part of the owner to abandon his own personal dominion over such property, and to devote the same to a definite public use.
2. Except in so far as the premises sued for may include portions of a public road not claimed by the defendant under an alleged dedication by the plaintiff's ancestor, the title of the plaintiff was established; and the defense relied upon, to the effect that the premises sued for had been, by the ancestor of the plaintiff, dedicated to the town for use as a public highway, was not sustained, and a general verdict in favor of the defendant was contrary to law, and upon a motion for a new trial, should have been set aside.
Error from superior court, De Kalb county; John C. Hart, Judge.
Action by E. G. Swift and others against the mayor and others of Lithonia to recover land. From a judgment for defendants plaintiffs bring error. Reversed.
Candler & Thomson, for plaintiffs in error.
R. W Milner, for defendants in error.
1. Where a dedication of his property to a public use is relied upon to defeat the claim of one holding the legal title to the property, the acts relied upon to establish such dedication must be such as clearly showed a purpose on the part of the owner to abandon his personal dominion over such property, and to devote the same to a definite public use. "Intention to dedicate property to public use is essential to a dedication, but this may be proved by acts showing an assent that the property should be so used and enjoyed." Collins v. Mayor, etc., 69 Ga. 542; City of Indianapolis v. Kingsbury, 101 Ind. 200; Manderschid v. City of Dubuque, 29 Iowa 73; Tinges v. Mayor, etc., 51 Md. 600; Mayor, etc v. White, 62 Md. 362; City of Detroit v. Detroit & M. R. Co., 23 Mich. 173; Rozell v. Andrews, 103 N.Y. 150, 8 N.E. 513; Civ. Code, § 3591. 2 Dill. Mun. Corp. (4th Ed.) § 636 et seq. In order to constitute a dedication of land to public uses, an intention on the part of the owner to abandon the use of the land to the public must be...
To continue reading
Request your trial