Arnold v. Flattery
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- State ex rel. Duncan v. Chippewa Township Trustees (Ohio 1995)
- State ex rel. Duncan v. Chippewa Twp. Trustees (Ohio 1995)
- Beebe v. Scheidt (Ohio 1862)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Where a road has been laid out in the manner jirescribed hy law, opened and used many years, it can not be allowed that it shall be suddenly closed by any individual through whose land it passes, on the hypothesis that the road used does not exactly follow the courses and distances of the recorded survey. Nor can it be required, after the lapse of many years, that-to sustain a public road every preliminary step directed to be. taken in establishing it must be proven by existing papers or records. In this case the court admitted the record and parol proof of the opening and using the road. The record was admitted to establish the fact that the road had been applied for and ordered; the proof of the opening and use, to show where it was actually opened and used. We think that in this there was no error. A new trial must be. refused.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.