81 Ind. App. 20 | Ind. Ct. App. | 1923
Suit by appellants to enjoin appellees from obstructing an alleged public highway. The court found the facts specially, and stated its conclusions of law thereon in favor of appellees. The questions, which under the rules of this court, have been, presented by appellants for determination, arise on an exception to the conclusions of law.
Appellants by their complaint aver, among other things, that they are tenants in common of a tract of real estate, and that a certain described road furnishes them the only way of ingress and egress to and from- such real estate; that the road is a public highway; and that appellees are about to, and will, if not restrained, obstruct such highway by the erection of fences and gates. Under the issues as presented by the pleadings, appellants are not entitled to injunctive relief, unless the road which appellees are threatening to obstruct is a public highway. The burden of proving the road a public highway was, at the trial, upon appellants. Therefore, unless it has been found as an ultimate fact that the road in question is a public highway, or primary facts are found which force the inference to that effect, the conclusions of law must be sustained. See State v. American Ins. Co. (1922), 79 Ind. App. 88, 137 N. E. 338.
It is well settled that an exception to conclusions of law based upon a special finding of facts admits, for the purpose of the exception, that all facts within the issues are correctly found; likewise that the failure to find a material fact in issue is equivalent to an express finding against the party having the burden of proof as to such fact.
In view of the conclusion reached, consideration of other questions presented is unnecessary.
Affirmed.