,t- .-

JIM MAnOX Attorney Generrl

SupmIne court SUlldlng P.0. sax 12545 Aurm lx 75711.2545 5cw752501 le*x Dlom7C1247 lelecoplw 512J47s205

714Jwksm. Sull. 700 OallW, 7x. 752024505 2w742a944

1001TWW. SIN* 700
. Nausmn, lx 770023111 71Y222-58m 

# The Attorney General ofTexas kay 14. 1985 i

Ronorablc Jerry Cobb Criminal Diotrlct Attoroey P. 0. Eox 2344 Denton. Texas 762C1 Opinion Ro. a-317 lb?: Whether a comissioners court my approve a plat and accept a road for county maintenance under certain conditiona Dear l4r. **Cobb:** You have rcqueeted our opinion regarding two questions. First, ,ou ask: .<.

1. Can a commissioners court approve a plat and accept roade for county maintenance if three landownercl have not signed tha plat dedicating the road to **tlro**public? **It is**  **afaa** indiutol that **.thrrc** are more than three landowners of the land in the plat. and that the three landovncr~, refusing to sign the plat, ouu separate **:Lots**within the plat.

_~A comisrionar:~~ **court** -uy. **aerclme** only ‘mch povers as the coostitution or **thwetatuter** lmve opcclficall~ conferred upon them. Cuulu v. ~Langhlzlu,-214 S.W.2d 451~.,-453 (Tex.’ 1948). Section 

# ~&l(d) -0% l rticl875702-1, V.t.C.8:.

mtho rlsee l c omhsioneru **court** of a

### m~,twappr~r re l :plar-of ‘a eubdivirlon dadkatiug’roads to the put&+ by:th;yi.af the ,land subdivIded in the~.pUt;. ‘V.T.C.S. ari. 6702-li~.~112AOl(a), (d). If the .uurmr’oi wnera’df the tract of land a÷d :.,in the .plat follow the ~speclfied statutory procedure outlined in seetim 2.401. of articlr.~:6702-1, V.T.C.S., the comicsionero court ir rot .authorizad to’-reject the filing of the plat. Cashnera’ Court v. **?rank ’** **Jester** Development Co., 199 S.W.2d 1004.

.~1007 (Tu. civ. Am: - Dallas 19b7.;nit ref ’d n.r.e.1 (arkoval of a pkt &perly ill;4 ia a ninirter~l duty of the co&k&ers court). Sactfon 2.bOl(b) of article 6702-l. V.T.C.S.. **prwides:**

(b) The owner of any tract of land

. . . vho mayhereafter divide the **(I- in**  **tvo** or **mre parts**  for the Inmpose of laying out any oubdiviaion of any such tract of land

. . . or **for** laying out suburban lots or building lota, and for the purpom of laying out rtreetr. rlley or parb, or

p. 1450Uoaorable Jerry Cobb - ?alr 2 (JM-317)

other portion8 intmded for public uee . . . ahall cause a plat to ba_ude thereof.

. . . (EmpE added). Thir prwfrion requires the %uner’ of the tract of land to be subdivided to cause a plat to \I(:made. Although this prwfslon uses the teru “wrier” in the singular , it must be read in harmony vith the entire ntatute. See Turnpike Authority v. Shepperd. 279 S.W.Zd 302 (Tu. 1955). - **Section** 2.401(c) of article 6702-l provider ae follows:

(c) Every such plat shall be duly acknouledged by ovnera or proprietor8 of the land, or by some duly authorized egent of said ovoera or proprletore, in the mannerrequired for acknovledgemcnt ofeeda

. Subject to the provisions contained In this section, suc’h plat shall be filed for record and be recorded lo the office of the county clerk of the county in *hich the land lien. (Emphasie added)... Bence, vben eectiorm 2&l(b) -and:.(c) are read together It can be concluded that the legislature contemplated that there might be more than one landomer of the tract of land to be subdivided. Therefore, the comisaloners court is not authorlaed to apprwe a plat which has been filed vithout all -~of,the landovners ’ rignatures. V.T.C.S art. 6702-l. S2.bOlk). In addi+oo. you l kvhetber the conisslonem court uy accept the.toad# on,+he.pkt -for txrun~ maintenance uhen~thethree landowners baye not rigned &be plat dtxlicatiog thexo+s .tn.the. pablic. Approval .of: a plat and&ecu tance. of Kplat dedicating roada to the public are

. ‘

..wparate .@ b-9--- lat net **.,fmu:tima :** **of the**  **mmhdner*~** **court. Cow**  tirsiooers

’ ,~Court mb **Ramk.**Jester Develovment .Co.) .s AttoG General OoLuionSJn-200~.r<J~81). .Tbe fllinu of l-man-or’vlet vhlch rhovo a strok ~01road.~timr&, :vithout a&e, does not cokstftute a :: dedication. See.Cbarlstm v. Alvin State Bank, 638 S.W.2d 643 (Fex. APR. **- Waco** **%62,** .a.it %f ’d -a.r.e.). In order to effectuate an l sprese dedication, there must be an intent -to dedicate.; a c-nicatian of the intent *cd‘Ieiilcate;’ and an.acceptance~ of **&he**land being dedicatul. See :Pord: V.I.1Iorm, 592 S.W.2d 385 (Tu. Civ. App:’ - iexarkana 198xWmriixt..); see also **Attorney** General Opinion JM-2.00 * The landovner or **ovntrt** of **the** tract of land must evidence an Intent to appropriate the land rbom .in **the** plat for ecme proper public purpose. See-**Adams**v. Rowleo. 228 S.U.2d 849 (Tex. 1950). The

- -- filing of a pllp or plat ill only an offer to dedicate the-streets shorn thereon to the public. SW 30Ta. Jur. 3dDedication $20 (1983). **A** comlssionar# court is aG?Eorlred to accept propartp dedicated to the public. Cf. Cheeaer~ v. Grocsa, 302 ,S.W.2d 480 (Tex. Civ. App. -

- 

### -. ‘!

p. 1451~?L

\- - - : Eonorablc Jerry Cobb - rage :) (Jlt47)

**Beaumont**1957, no writ); Commissioners ’ **Court** v. **Frank** Jeerer Developmsnt Co., s. Ufthou~~c thrae landmmcro’ signatures. there la no effective offer or intent to dedicate the land shown on tha plat sven though these owners own separate tracts of land. Wetherefore conclude **thet** the coliaaio~~ers court say not .eccept these roads for public **mslntenance** because ,cbere has beeu no dedicatiou of the roads to ths public. You also **ask:**

2. Can e commhsioner pave a road if the plst has not been approved if the landowners who have not dedicated the road sign awaiver? Since the plat has not ‘been approved by the **ccedssioners** court, there can be uo statutory dedication of these roads to tbe public under Texss 1s~. See V.T.C.5. art. 6702-l. 52.401; see also Attorney General Opinion Jkl-200. The only methods by which these roads mayhe dedicated to the public are through express or implied dedication. A prior opinion of this officl? explains:

**Attorney** Common-lav dedications are of ’ tvo classes - express and i@ied.

. . . In both, it is necessary that there be an appropriation of the land by the owner to public use, in the one case, by some express manifestation of his purpose to devote the land to public **use;** in the other. by some act or cour1w of conduct from vhlch the lav vould imply such rr~intent. (Citation mitted). General Opinion JM-200 (1984). Unless the **waivers** executed by the landowners widena: an intent to dedicate. and the coepissioners court accepts the express or implied dedlcstion of land by these landowners, tha cordssloners court may not pave thess roads vith public funds. Id. **A** waiver is the voluntary or intentional abandoment or relinqu~hwnt of a knownright. See Trlce v. Georgia liomes Insurance Co., 81 S.U.2d 1055 (Tex. Civ. **AK** - Amarillo 1935, no writ). Therefore, a ctmlmlasioners court is authorized to pave a **road** if the landowners vha have not signed the plst execute avsiver to dedicate the roads to I:be public provided that there has been an acceptance by the cosmdrsloners court. A coedssioners court expressly accepts a dedicat:Lon when it votes and ootes the 

### l eceptance In the minutes. Attorney (kneral Opinion m-200. SUMMARY Article 6702..!., sections 2.401(b) and Cc). V.T.C.S.. prohibit a cownlssion~rs court from approving a plal: dedicating roads to the public vlthout the signatures of all the landowners of

p. 1452Ronorable Jerry Cobb - ?ase 4 W-317)

the trsct to be subdivided. Ror uy a cofmbissioners c ourt

l ecq~r: roads for public maintenance whenthere has not ‘been sn intent to dedicate by all tha landovners evidenced by their signature on the plat. Eouevei: ,, the eoaisslonys court ia authorized to accel?t the plat snd p&e the roads dedicated to the public if the landowners, whose signature does net appear on the plat. have executed a waive:, evidencing their intent to dedicate the roads to the public.

JIX HATTOX Attorney General of Texss TOMGMRR **First** Assistant **Attorney** Genwal DAVIDR. **RICRARDS** Executive Assistsnt Attorney Cineral ROBERT

GRAY Specks1 Assistant **Attorney** Gmeral RICKGILPIR Chairmen, Opinion Collrnittee Prepsred by TonyGuillory **Assistant Attorney**  General &PPROV%D: OPINION

MITTXP# Rick Gilpin, Chairman Jon Bible Colin Carl Susan Garriscm Tony Guilloq JimMellinger Jennifer Riggs Nancy Sutton

p. 1453