New York Law Review

Tag: Private Road

  • Marchand v. Village of Bayville, 19 N.Y.3d 618 (2012): Establishes Requirements for a Private Road to Become a Public Street

    Marchand v. Village of Bayville, 19 N.Y.3d 618 (2012)

    A private road does not become a public street under Village Law § 6-626 unless the village maintains and repairs the road.

    Summary

    Ronald and Margaret Marchand sued the Village of Bayville to quiet title to a dirt road (“Travelled Way”) running through their property. The Village claimed the road was a public street under Village Law § 6-626 due to public use for over ten years. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s decision in favor of the Village, holding that public use alone is insufficient. The Court reaffirmed the requirement that the Village must also maintain and repair the road to establish it as a public street. The Court reasoned that public responsibility for maintenance and repair is essential for a road to be considered public.

    Facts

    Ronald and Margaret Marchand owned property in the Village of Bayville through which a dirt road, the “Travelled Way,” ran. The Village obtained a permit to perform drainage work under the road. The Marchands challenged the permit, asserting the road was private property. The Village claimed the road was a public street because the public had used it for over ten years.
    The Village admitted it did not maintain or repair the road; the Marchands and their predecessors performed those duties. The Village argued that services like police and fire protection, snow plowing, water main maintenance, and garbage pickup constituted taking the road “in charge.”

    Procedural History

    The Supreme Court, after a nonjury trial, ruled in favor of the Village, declaring the Travelled Way a village street. The Appellate Division affirmed. The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.

    Issue(s)

    Whether a private road becomes a public street under Village Law § 6-626 when the public uses it for over ten years, but the village does not maintain or repair it.

    Holding

    No, because Village Law § 6-626 requires not only public use for ten years or more but also that the village maintain and repair the road. The Village’s provision of general services, like police protection and snow removal, does not constitute maintaining or repairing the road.

    Court’s Reasoning

    The Court of Appeals relied on its prior decisions in Speir v. Town of New Utrecht, 121 N.Y. 420 (1890), People v. Sutherland, 252 N.Y. 86 (1929), and Impastato v. Village of Catskill, 43 N.Y.2d 888 (1978), to reaffirm the principle that a road is not public unless the public takes responsibility for its maintenance and repair. The Court emphasized that “[t]he road must not only be traveled upon, but it must be kept in repair or taken in charge and adopted by the public authorities” (quoting Speir, 121 N.Y. at 429-430). The Court rejected the Village’s argument that providing general services such as police and fire protection, snow removal, and garbage collection constituted taking the road “in charge,” holding that these services are insufficient without actual maintenance and repair.
    The Court quoted Impastato v. Village of Catskill, noting that “[n]aked use by the public is not enough, as plaintiffs must further demonstrate that the village has continuously maintained and repaired the alleged street and, thus, assumed control thereof during the period of time in question” (55 AD2d 714, 715 [3d Dept 1976]).
    The Court reasoned that this rule is fair because it ensures that the public takes responsibility for maintaining roads that are considered public.

  • Diamond International Corp. v. Little Kildare, Inc., 22 N.Y.2d 819 (1968): Establishing a Public Highway Through Usage

    22 N.Y.2d 819 (1968)

    Mere usage by the public of a private road, even for an extended period, is insufficient to convert it into a public highway without evidence that public authorities have maintained, controlled, or adopted the road for the statutory period.

    Summary

    Diamond International Corporation sued Little Kildare, Inc. to establish a private right-of-way across Little Kildare’s land. Diamond International claimed a public highway existed based on public usage of the relocated Water Road. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s decision favoring Diamond International, holding that mere public usage is not enough to establish a public highway. There must be evidence that public authorities maintained or adopted the road as their own for the statutory period to demonstrate an exercise of public dominion.

    Facts

    Water Road was relocated. Diamond International Corporation claimed a right to use the road across Little Kildare, Inc.’s property, arguing that it had become a public highway due to public usage.

    Procedural History

    The Supreme Court, St. Lawrence County, ruled in favor of Little Kildare. The appellate division reversed that decision. The Court of Appeals reversed the appellate division’s decision and reinstated the Supreme Court’s original judgment, thus denying Diamond International’s claim of a public highway.

    Issue(s)

    Whether mere usage by the public of a relocated private road is sufficient to convert it into a public highway, absent evidence that the road was maintained, controlled, or adopted by public authorities for the statutory period.

    Holding

    No, because mere usage by the public of a private road as relocated is not sufficient to convert it into a public highway absent a showing that the road was kept in repair or taken in charge and adopted by public authorities for the statutory period.

    Court’s Reasoning

    The Court of Appeals based its decision on established New York law concerning the creation of public highways. The Court referenced prior decisions (Pirman v. Confer, 273 N.Y. 357; People v. Sutherland, 252 N.Y. 86; Speir v. Town of New Utrecht, 121 N.Y. 420) and Section 189 of the Highway Law to support its ruling. The key point was that simply using a road, even if the public does so regularly, does not make it a public road. “Mere usage by the public of Water Road as relocated is not sufficient to convert this private road into a public highway absent a showing that the road was kept in repair or taken in charge and adopted by public authorities for the statutory period.” There needs to be an indication that the public, through its government, has asserted dominion and control over the road. The record lacked evidence that the public had maintained or taken charge of the relocated Water Road. The absence of this evidence was fatal to Diamond International’s claim.