Court Rejects Claim that Roadway was Dedicated to Township
A lot owner in a partially completed subdivision sued a township, claiming that the township was legally responsible for maintaining and controlling a road that provided access to the owner's lot. The lot owner also sued the owner of the remaining lots in the subdivision alleging that she interfered with his access by placing a locked gate on the road. The trial court dismissed the case against both defendants, and the lot owner appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court.
On appeal, the Appellate Court determined that the lot owner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet the standard for establishing that the road at issue was, in fact, dedicated to the township. The Court acknowledged that the subdivision plat provided sufficient evidence of "donative intent" (i.e., that the parties intended that the road be dedicated to the township as a public road) but there was no evidence to support the lot owner's argument that the road dedication was actually accepted by the township. As a result, the Court determined that the trial court properly dismissed the claims against the township, finding that the road was not dedicated to the township as a public road, so the township had no responsibility over the road.
As for the claims against the subdivision owner, the Appellate Court reversed the dismissal, finding that the lot owner sufficiently alleged that the subdivision owner interfered with his rights to access his lot through the road by installing a gate or other barricade, and those claims could proceed at the trial court.
Apps v. Crete Township Highway Commissioner
