Wolfskill v. County of Los Angeles
Citations
- 86 Cal. 405
- 24 P. 1094
- 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1043
Syllabus
<p>Dedication of Streets and Highways — Recorded Map — Offer and Acceptance. — The filing and recording of a map is but an offer of dedication of the streets and highways delineated thereon; and in order to constitute a dedication which can be taken advantage of by the public authorities, the offer of dedication must have been accepted by them, either by user or by some formal act of acceptance.</p> <p>Id. —■ Limitation of Acceptance to Particular Streets. — The acceptance, by user or otherwise, of one or more particular streets or highways shown upon a recorded map will not operate as an acceptance of all or any other of the streets or highways delineated thereon.</p> <p>Id.—Time for Acceptance—Revocation of Offer — Effect of Acceptance.— The acceptance of a street dedicated to the public must be within a reasonable time after the offer of dedication, and if not accepted, the owner may resume the possession of the property, and thereby revoke his offer; but the offer cannot be withdrawn, if the public accepted it within a reasonable time, before any attempt to withdraw it, or to make any use of the property offered other or different from that made when the offer was recorded.</p> <p>Id. ■— Acts of Acceptance by Public Authorities — Evidence. •— Publicly dealing with property dedicated as a highway, widening, extending, and grading it, changing its name, and the like, are acts tending to prove acceptance by the public authorities; and evidence of such acts, if uncontradicted, is sufficient to establish an acceptance of the dedication, although no formal resolution of acceptance was passed by the board of supervisors.</p> <p>Id. — Right of Purchaser to Dedicate Streets — Construction of Contract of Sale — Impairment of Vendor’s Inclosure. — Where a large tract of land is sold upon installments, with the express understanding that upon the making of the first deferred payment the vendee should have the right to subdivide the same into smaller tracts, with streets and
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- where appellant did not object to juror’s continued service, “he has thus waived appellate review of the alleged impropriety. In any event, the trial court is vested with discretion to discharge a juror under OCGA § 15-12-172”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Fox
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.