182 Conn. App. 674
Conn. App. Ct.2018Background
- Plaintiffs (six residents/owners on Old Good Hill Road, Oxford) sued under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 13a-103 seeking an order requiring the town to repair and maintain unimproved portions (sections 2–4) of Old Good Hill Road.
- The road is divided into four sections: section 1 (paved, town-maintained); section 2 (unpaved, passable by foot or 4x4, serves plaintiffs’ house); section 3 (steep, rutted, overgrown, foot‑only); section 4 (paved area that functions as driveway for landowner Lucas and connects to Freeman Road).
- The trial court inspected the entire road with the parties, heard conflicting testimony about historical public use, and focused the trial on whether sections 2–4 comprise part of a highway or had been abandoned.
- Defendants pleaded abandonment as a special defense and the trial court found, alternatively, that even if the sections had once been a highway they had been abandoned by public nonuse and municipal inaction.
- The trial court found at least 25 years of effective nonuse by the unorganized public, no town maintenance of sections 2–4, and town officials testified they had no present plans to maintain or accept those sections.
- Plaintiffs appealed, arguing the court erred in finding the sections were not part of a highway and that they had been abandoned; the appellate court affirmed the judgment below.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sections 2–4 comprise a public highway by dedication and acceptance | Plaintiffs: Old Good Hill Road has historical recognition on maps/deeds and prior town activity that demonstrate dedication and acceptance | Defendants: Town long refused to acknowledge/maintain the unimproved sections; public use dissipated long ago | Held: Court did not need to decide fully on dedication because it found abandonment; plaintiffs failed to prove dedication and acceptance in light of other evidence |
| Whether sections 2–4 have been abandoned | Plaintiffs: Any historical public use persisted or indicia of acceptance overcome nonuse | Defendants: Long public nonuse, municipal nonmaintenance, and indications of private use/obstruction show abandonment | Held: Abandonment proven by preponderance — at least ~25 years nonuse by public, town never maintained and has no plans to do so; intent to abandon inferred |
| Whether municipal inaction precludes finding abandonment | Plaintiffs: Municipal ownership/trust presumes public use absent clear abandonment | Defendants: Municipal nonrecognition and no maintenance/records show no intent to retain highway status | Held: Municipal ownership does not prevent abandonment; both municipal and public inaction can support inference of abandonment |
| Standard of review for factual finding of abandonment | Plaintiffs: Trial court erred in weighing credibility and facts | Defendants: Trial court’s factual findings and on-site inspection entitled to deference | Held: Appellate court defers to trial court on credibility and findings; abandonment finding not clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- Montanaro v. Aspetuck Land Trust, Inc., 137 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. 2012) (abandonment, dedication, acceptance are questions of fact; abandonment may be inferred from circumstances)
- Benjamin v. Norwalk, 170 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. 2016) (nonuse by the public, not municipality, must be shown for abandonment)
- Newkirk v. Sherwood, 89 Conn. 598 (Conn. 1915) (intent to abandon may be inferred from surrounding circumstances)
- Appeal of Phillips, 113 Conn. 40 (Conn. 1931) (abandonment may be presumed from long continued neglect)
- Stavola v. Palmer, 136 Conn. 670 (Conn. 1950) (definition and essential features of a highway)
- American Trading Real Estate Properties, Inc. v. Trumbull, 215 Conn. 68 (Conn. 1990) (municipal ownership presumed held in trust for public absent evidence of intent to abandon)
- Hensley v. Commissioner of Transportation, 211 Conn. 173 (Conn. 1989) (trial court's view of premises on inspection is substantive evidence)