Thorpe v. Clanton

Citations

• 10 Ariz. 94
• 85 P. 1061
• 1906 Ariz. LEXIS 105

Syllabus

<p>1. Highways — Dedication—Sale of Lots with Deference to Plat— Estoppel. — Where a dedication is made, but there has been no acceptance by the. public, if the owner has sold lots or blocks according to the description given in a map or plat, such owner upon the doctrine of estoppel in pais, is precluded from revoking the dedication.</p> <p>2. Highways — Obstruction—Injunction—Only Granted to Individual Where Special Injury is Shown. — Individuals who purchased lots with reference to a plat showing certain streets which had been dedicated to a town, have no right to an injunction against the owner of the land to prevent him from closing said streets, unless such individuals can show that they would be specially-injured by such closing.</p> <p>3. Same — Same—Same—Presumption.—There is no general presumption of fact of special injury to a purchaser of lots according to a plat from the mere closing of a Street dedicated thereby; there must be some showing that the complainants are injured in a way not suffered by the public to make out a case for an injunction.</p> <p>4. Same — Same—Findings of Fact — Must not be Mere Conclusions of Law. — A finding that tlio plaintiffs have a mutual interest in the common use of the streets of a townsite and as inhabitants of the townsite are interested in keeping them open, is merely a conclusion of law, shows no special injury to plaintiffs and is insufficient to' sustain a judgment enjoining an owner from obstructing certain streets in a townsite, in an action by persons who purchased lots with reference to a plat showing certain streets, to enjoin the owner from obstructing such streets.</p>