Honorable Fl. E. 

county Attorney 

Bar Sir: 

Opinion No. ~w-lOg6 

‘Re: Whether the, Coaunlssloners~ 

Court may maintain a private 

road of an individual who 

dedicates the private road 

to public uee and the dtdlcation Is accepted by the 

commlaalontrst Court, and 

related questions. 

Your request for an opM& from ‘our office Is aubstantially stated ap follows: 

jury 20, 1961 

Whether the Commlsalonerst Cbrt may 

maintain a private road of an lndivlduhl 

who dtdlaates the private road to public 

use and the dtdlcatlon is acoepted by the 

Commlsaionere~ Court and related questions. 

From information furnished us by you, It aipeak that 

the lairdowner In qutetion haa txpreagly dedicated a private road 

for public use and there ha8 also been an acceptance by the Commls’aloners~ Coiirt of your County. Although a common law dedioation haa taken $laoe, attiain ~rtqulremtnts such as publlo purpose, 

competency OS dedicator, and offer and aoceptance have been 

complied with. Thti Commlsaloners~ Court holds the uat of the 

dedloattd property In trust for the publtc. 

Ae you stated ln your requtet; Borne difficulty was 

encountered in the paet when the County maintained private made 

at public txpenee. We must assume in thla aaee. that the landowner 

bad a public purpose ln mind and that the Comm.lsslanersl Court 

acted reasonably ln the absence of a showing to the contrary. 

Here also the road ln question dots connect directly with the 

county mad system. 

In nmy c&see improvements have been made by the Oommisslonera’ Court on property dedicated both txpreesly and iqplledly, 

and.acqulescenot therein by the landowntre haa~been ueed to show 

an Intention to detllcate. 

t 

Tribble v. l%llaa RY. & Terminal Com- 

@no, J 

3 

S.W.26 933 Clv.App. 1929 , error ref. ), Ealctns v. Qarrlson, 27 S.W.2d 510 Civ.App. 1955, error ref. n.r.t,) In YO’= 

. 
Honorable R. E. Way, page 2. (w-1096) 

aIt;wtlon there la no controversy a8 to dedlcation,~htnce the 

c0~issioners’ court may make any lf4rovements or use any oounty 

machinery on property 80 dedicated. 

your rlrat related question concerns a private. landowner’s petitioning the Commlssloners 1 Court to make his private 

road a public one. If seven additional freeholdere join hlm in 

the petItIon and ali requisites of Article 6705 et seq., Vernon’s 

civil Statutea lava been complied with, then the Commisalonera~ 

Court may maintain such with any of Ita maChIIN3rY a8 they would 

any other pub110 road. 

Your second related question presents the altuatlon 

wherein a private landowner petitions the Commlaslonerrr~ Court 

to make his private road a public road. The question arlrres 

as.to whether sufflclent necessity exists for a jury of view to 

be appointed when aald road la traveled by the landowner’s family, 

hIe married children, hle neighbors going to vlalt him and by any. 

on& else who might have an occasion to travel to the landowner~s 

home tither on buslnese or for pleasure. 

Aa to whether a road 1a’“neceasary” a8 that word la 

used In Article 6703, Vernon’s Civil Statutee, la entirely In 

the diacretlon of the CommIaslonere~ Court, hence only a question of iact is presented. This office only advises on queatlona of law. Under Article 6703, the Commieslonere’ Court may 

open public roads “when necessary. ’ Whether thIe particular 

road will be of benefit to the public Is for your Commissioners( 

.Court. alone to decide. A benefit to Individual8 is not necesaarily lnconelstent with a benefit to the public. Set 21 Tex.Jur., 

555 et w., Highways, Sec. 17. When the ComaIssIonere~ Court 

has made It8 determination, then the jury of’ View la to be appointed by said court by virtue of Article 6706 of Vernon’s civil 

Statutea. 

SUMMARY 

When an Individual landowner 

dtdiaatta hib private road to 

public use, the Comaissloners~ 

Court may accept said road for 
Honorable R. E. Gray, page 3. (~~-1036) 

the uee of the public and may 

maintain It with county machinery, 

Your0 very truly, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney Qeneral of Texas 

‘* .&Y2lst?M4 

Fred D. Ward 

Fm:lgh:ti Aeei&%nt 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMWI!lTRE 

tbrgah Nenbltt, Chairman 

Harris Toler 

Virgil Pulllam 

.(ul*rt mrgrayt 

REVlHEDFORTHEA!tl'ORNEYQENERAL 

By: Leonard Pasemort