Broussard v. Jablecki

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• distinguishing cases cited in support of claim that plat and deeds mentioning plat constituted a valid dedication when cited cases involved an identified owner who dedicated the land before filing the plat
• “Here, the Jableckis did not prove who owned the land when the plat was made, or that the owner then, in 1894, intended to dedicate the road to the public. Therefore, the Jableckis did not conclusively prove a dedication.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).