State v. Olasov
State v. Olasov.
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Watts.
*146 For the reasons assigned by his Honor, Judge Shipp, it is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.
Mr. Chief Justice Gary concurs.
Messrs. Justices Cothran, Marion and Mr. Acting Associate Justice R. O. Purdy concur in result.
Concurrence
Mr. Justice Cothran (concurring) : I concur in the result of this case upon the following grounds :
While unquestionably the turnpike company has dedicated the highway to the public and the easement is a public easement and not private property, the turnpike company still retains the fee-simple title to the land. The public has an easement to use the road upon the payment of tolls provided for in the Act incorporating the turnpike company; that is, the public has a qualified easement. A person, therefore, who attempts to use the highway in defiance of and in breach of that condition, after notice, commits a trespass upon the land of another after notice.
Even if the defendant had the right of ingress and egress from his lot to the road before the incoporation of the turnpike company, he has waived his right thereto by joining in the common purpose of establishing a turnpike road for the use of which all persons are required to pay toll.
The other matters referred to in the decree of Judge Shipp have not been considered and in my opinion should not be considered adjudged by the judgment of this Court.
Mr. Justice Marion and Mr. Acting Associate Justice R. O. Purdy concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.