Pimental v. River Junction Estates LLC

Syllabus

The plaintiffs, D, M, J and G, who owned properties in Thompson that abutted property of the defendant R Co., sought, inter alia, to quiet title to a disputed portion of a road, which separated the property of J and G from R Co.'s property and which R Co. claimed was a public highway. Following a trial to the court, the trial court found in favor of the plaintiffs and the defendant town of Thompson on the quiet title claim. On appeal, R Co. claimed that the court erred in failing to find a mani- fested intent by the owner of the fee to dedicate the disputed portion of the road to public use. Held that the trial court did not err in determin- ing that there had been no implied dedication of the disputed portion as a public road: the court determined that the historical references on which R Co. relied, including the disputed portion's appearance in historical maps and its reference as a boundary in various deeds, did not compel the conclusion that an unidentified owner of the land under the road manifested an intent to dedicate the road for public use, and the court was not required to presume dedication as a matter of law, as evidence of prolonged use as a public highway was lacking; moreover, R Co.'s argument that the disputed portion was necessarily a public road because R Co.'s property otherwise would remain a landlocked parcel was without merit, as the determination of an easement by neces- sity would have required a distinct analysis from whether particular land had been dedicated to public use. Argued March 3, 2020—officially released September 14, 2021