Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar

Summary

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar McKey v. Hyde Park — Opinion of the Court

A dedication, from an user of twenty years, and for a shorter time, may be presumed, but is not conclusive. The owner might show any fact which would overcome the presumption.' In City of Chicago v. Johnson, 98 Ill. 618, 624, 625, the court laid down the doctrine on this subject as follows: 'A dedication of private property to public uses will not be held to be established except upon satisfactory proof, either of an actual dedication, or of such acts or declarations as should equitably estop the owner from denying such intention.
Source: Wikisource

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar McKey v. Hyde Park — Opinion of the Court

Whether these facts were sufficient to explain the non-action of the plaintiff, and to negative the presumption of a dedication or not, was a question for the jury, which the court, by its charge, in effect, withdrew from their consideration.
We do not deem it necessary to refer to any of the other assignments of error, as those we have discussed are sufficient to dispose of the case.
Source: Wikisource

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar McKey v. Hyde Park — Opinion of the Court

No such acts or declarations, however, are shown. All that is proved is mere non-action on their part, or, in other words, a mere omission to assert their title as against the public. Mere non-action will not raise an implication of an intention to dedicate private property to public use, nor will it estop the owner to deny such intention.' See, also, Herhold v.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature