Title: Rugg v. Jones
Citation: 403 P.2d 770
Docket Number: 21545
State: Colorado
Issuer: Colorado Supreme Court
Date: July 6, 1965

403 P.2d 770 (1965) Clara RUGG, Plaintiff in Error, v. John M. JONES, Sr., John M. Jones, Jr., Virginia Jones Kent and Emery C. Olsen, Defendants in Error. No. 21545. Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc. July 6, 1965. Ray A. Gunning, Boulder, for plaintiff in error. Howard K. Phillips, Philip A. Rouse, Denver, for defendants in error. MOORE, Justice. On August 2, 1963, the defendants in error, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs, filed their complaint against the plaintiff in error, hereinafter referred to as defendant. They sought relief by way of preliminary and permanent injunction against the defendant for barricading what was alleged to be a public road which gave plaintiffs access to their mountain homes fronting on Washington street in the town of Eldora, Boulder county. The trial court held a hearing on preliminary injunction on August 9, 1963, at which oral testimony and exhibits were presented by both sides, following which an order granting a preliminary injunction was entered. On April 21 and 22, 1964, trial of the issues was had upon the application of plaintiffs for a permanent injunction. On June 29, 1964, the trial court entered its *771 findings which generally found the issues of fact and law in favor of the plaintiffs. The permanent injunction was thereupon decreed as prayed for by the plaintiffs. The sole question which was presented to the trial court for determination was whether the roadway involved in this controversy was a "public highway" as that term is defined in C.R.S.1963, 120-1-1(3) which reads as follows: In the instant action the trial court specifically found, inter alia, that: "17. I find that the rights claimed by the Plaintiffs were as members of the public generally to travel a public highway. I find that Plaintiffs elected not to claim their right of access as a private easement belonging to their dominant estates along Washington Street and burdening the Defendant's land as a servient estate. I therefore find it is unnecessary to quiet title in Plaintiffs to a private easement, as prayed by them in their first claim for relief. I find, however, that a decree should be made declaring that a public highway exists across Defendant's land, and that Plaintiffs have full and unrestricted, peaceable and permanent rights to use the same as a public highway and that the Defendant, her servants, agents, attorneys employees and all persons acting under the control, authority and direction of her, should be and they hereby are permanently enjoined from erecting fences upon and across the public highway or roadway *772 leading through the Town of Eldora, which is clearly discernable as such upon the surface of the land of Defendant and which occupies the westerly 20 feet of Lot 7, Block 1, of Ben Hur Addition to the Town of Eldora, Boulder County, Colorado." An examination of the record before us discloses a wealth of evidence to support these and other detailed findings of the trial court. The law applicable to the facts was correctly applied. Martino v. Fleenor, 148 Colo. 136, 365 P.2d 247. The stay of execution heretofore entered by this court is vacated and set aside effective forthwith. The judgment is affirmed.