Western Kane County Special Service Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson Cattle Co., 20108
| Decision Date | 29 October 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 20108,20108 |
| Citation | 744 P.2d 1376 |
| Parties | WESTERN KANE COUNTY SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Utah, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JACKSON CATTLE COMPANY, a Utah corporation, Defendant and Respondent. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Hans Q. Chamberlain, Cedar City, for plaintiff and appellant.
Kay L. McIff, Richfield, for defendant and respondent.
Plaintiff ("the County") sought a ruling that certain roads crossing Jackson Cattle Company's ("Jackson") property were public roads and therefore could be used for public purposes without condemnation proceedings. The trial court found that one of the roads had once been a public road, but that the County is now equitably estopped from asserting the existence of a public roadway; the court found that the other roads never acquired the status of a public roadway. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The County constructed two roads, one running north-south and the other running east-west along the edge of Jackson's property. The County was granted an order of immediate occupancy after paying 75 percent of the cost of the land into court. At trial, the County sought to establish that Jackson's property was encumbered by public roadways along the route where the County's roads had been built. Alternatively, the County sought to condemn the land used for the roadways. The trial court found that the north-south road had once been a public highway, although it was never more than ten feet wide, and that the east-west road never acquired the status of a public highway. The trial court then ruled that the County was estopped from claiming the north-south road as a public highway owing to the long period of disuse by the public. The County's appeal raises three issues: (1) did the trial court commit reversible error in applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel to the north-south road; (2) did the trial court commit reversible error in holding that the east-west road was never a public roadway; and (3) was it reversible error for the court to find that the width of the north-south road was never more than ten feet?
We begin with the second and third issues. Under Utah law, "[a] highway shall be deemed to have been dedicated and abandoned to the use of the public when it has been continuously used as a public thoroughfare for a period of ten years." Utah Code Ann. § 27-12-89 (1984). The trial court found that the north-south road was used by the public from 1919 until 1931, when the highway was relocated and public use of the north-south road stopped. The court further found that during the period of public use, the road was only ten feet wide. 1 The court found that there was insufficient use of the east-west road by the public to raise its status to that of a public road. Under the principles of law just set forth, these findings of fact, if upheld, compel a holding that the north-south road was a public highway ten feet in width and that no public highway existed on the east-west road.
Rule 52(a) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure provides in part:
In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon, and judgment shall be entered pursuant to Rule 58A; in granting or refusing interlocutory injunctions the court shall similarly set forth the findings of fact and conclusions of law which constitute the grounds of its action. Requests for findings are not necessary for purposes of review. Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hamilton
... ... On August 1, after failing to obtain other transportation, ... One of Sant's co-workers, Royce Barton, saw her at approximately ... Officers of the Millard County Sheriff's Office arrived at the scene shortly ... Ronald Frank Johnson, owner of a Parowan service station at which Hamilton was a regular customer, ... State, 419 So.2d 810, 812-13 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1982); Fladung v. State, 4 Md.App. 664, ... Farr, 770 P.2d 131, 133 (Utah 1989); Western Kane County Special Serv. Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson Cattle Co., 744 P.2d 1376, 1378 (Utah 1987) ... ...
-
State in Interest of D.S.K.
... ... § 78-45c-1 to -25 (1987) or the federal Parental Kidnapping ... the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court of Orange County, Florida. Mother was given physical custody of ... Riley, 784 P.2d 1174 (Utah 1989); Western Kane County Spec. Serv. Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson attle Co"., 744 P.2d 1376, 1378 (Utah 1987) ... \xC2" ... special committee which drafted the Uniform Act, stated ... ...
-
In re Gen. Determination of Rights of Water
... 98 P.3d 1 2004 UT 67 152 Wash.2d 528 In the matter of the ... Creek Subdivision of the Salt Lake County East Division of the Utah Lake and Jordan River ... Corp. v. Pinecrest Pipeline Operating Co. (In re General Determination of Rights to Use ... Meyer accepted service of the proposed determination and filed no ... v. Dist. Ct., 61 Utah 103, 211 P. 957, 960 (1922)) ... Kane County Special Serv. Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson ... : The Inefficient Search for Efficiency in Western Water Use, 28 Envtl. L. 919, 942 (1998) ("`What ... ...
-
Reid v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co.
... ... for office space at a monthly rate of $1,100. The lease term was to end in October of ... Mitchell, 769 P.2d at 818; see Western Kane County Special Serv. Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson Cattle Co., 744 P.2d 1376, 1377 (Utah 1987); State v ... business which included rendering service to policyholders and selling insurance to ... ...
-
Utah Standards of Appellate Review
...trial court's finding was supported by sufficient evidence); Western Kane County Special Serv. Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson Cattle Co., 744 P.2d 1376, 1377 (Utah 1987) (trial court's factual findings were supported by sufficient evidence); Wade v. Stangl, 869 P.2d 9, 12 (Utah App. 1994); Slattery......