Arnold v. Flattery
This text of 5 Ohio 271 (Arnold v. Flattery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Where a road has been laid out in the manner jirescribed hy law, opened and used many years, it can not be allowed that it shall be suddenly closed by any individual through whose land it passes, on the hypothesis that the road used does not exactly follow the courses and distances of the recorded survey. Nor can it be required, after the lapse of many years, that-to sustain a public road every preliminary step directed to be. taken in establishing it must be proven by existing papers or records. In this case the court admitted the record and parol proof of the opening and using the road. The record was admitted to establish the fact that the road had been applied for and ordered; the proof of the opening and use, to show where it was actually opened and used. We think that in this there was no error. A new trial must be. refused.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 Ohio 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-v-flattery-ohio-1831.