California Court of Appeal

In a dispute concerning activities on a road which defendants had allegedly dedicated to the public, judgment finding plaintiff had no right to trim or destroy trees and vegetation on defendants' property is affirmed where: 1) there was no basis for finding an implied acceptance of a dedication offer by public use when the property's usage was consistent with the scope of an express private easement; and 2) the trial court correctly determined that a statutory offer of dedication may be revoked by the offeror to preclude later, implicit acceptance by public use, even though the offer must remain open as to the public entity to which it was made under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/09/2008
• Published 06/09/2008

Judges

• ROBIE, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Haley & Bilheimer, Allan S. Haley, John Bilheimer, Nevada City;  Patrick Henry Dwyer, for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant., King G. McPherson, Nevada City, for Defendants, Cross-complainants and Respondents.