154 Conn.App. 395
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Lee Cemetery (18th-century cemetery with Revolutionary War graves) is reached via a 50-foot right-of-way shown on the 1960 Harvey Heights subdivision map recorded in the Granby land records.
- The Hill Realty Corporation (developer) filed the subdivision plan in 1960 and conveyed lots referencing the "50 foot right-of-way to cemetery."
- Healy acquired abutting lot 12 in 1992; in 1994 the defendant Feins received by quitclaim deed the parcel identified on the map as the 50-foot right-of-way.
- After acquiring title, Feins obstructed the path at various times (fence, cargo container, gate); the town asserted the right-of-way had been dedicated to public use and sued for declaratory and injunctive relief (complaint filed 2011).
- At trial the town produced the recorded subdivision map, deeds referencing the right-of-way, and testimony that town employees, veterans, historians, and members of the public used the path to access and maintain the cemetery.
- Trial court found (1) Hill Realty manifested intent to dedicate via filing the subdivision plan and deeds, and (2) the public accepted the right-of-way through long-standing use; it declared the right-of-way valid and enjoined Feins from obstructing it. Judgment for town affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hill Realty manifested intent to dedicate the 50-ft strip as a public right-of-way | Filing the approved 1960 subdivision plan and conveying lots referencing the 50-ft right-of-way manifested intent to dedicate | The map endpoint does not show a continuous recorded easement to the cemetery across intervening parcels, so no effective dedication to public use | Intent satisfied: filing the subdivision plan and deeds referencing the right-of-way manifested dedication |
| Whether the right-of-way was accepted for public use | Longstanding, repeated use by town employees and members of the public to access and maintain Lee Cemetery constituted acceptance | Use was not continuous or large in number; town made no improvements or tax exemptions, so acceptance not established | Acceptance established by public use (actual, repeated use by appropriate users) even without municipal improvements |
| Effect of defendant’s 1994 quitclaim conveyance on public right-of-way | Town: quitclaim grantee took subject to existing public right-of-way if dedication existed | Feins: acquiring fee by quitclaim eliminated or extinguished the claimed public right-of-way | Quitclaim conveyed only whatever interest grantor had; if Hill Realty’s property was subject to the right-of-way in 1994, Feins took title subject to it; quitclaim did not defeat the right-of-way |
Key Cases Cited
- Meder v. Milford, 190 Conn. 72 (discusses elements of dedication: intent and acceptance)
- Katz v. West Hartford, 191 Conn. 594 (filing a subdivision plan satisfies the intent element of dedication)
- A & H Corp. v. Bridgeport, 180 Conn. 435 (public acceptance may be shown by public use or municipal acts such as maintenance)
- Phillips v. Stamford, 81 Conn. 408 (public acceptance can be found despite limited or seasonal pedestrian use)