Court Opinion

ID: 9810740
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:57:11.030744+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:10.671598
License: Public Domain

OlaeKsoN, J.
Concurring in result: W. C. Edwards claims a vested right and easement on the highway in controversy. This private easement or vested right that he contends he owns over this highway, he has a right to have kept open for his private use under his vested right and easement. As said in Davis v. Alexander, 202 N. C., 130 (131-2), citing numerous authorities: “The law applicable to this action is well stated in 2 Elliott, Roads and Streets (4th Ed.), part sec. 1172, at p. 1668 : 'Once a highway always a highway/ is an old maxim of the common law to which we have often referred, and so far as concerns the rights of abutters, or others occupying a similar position, who have lawfully and in good faith invested money or obtained property interests in the just expectation of the continued existence of the highway, the maxim still holds good. Not even the legislature can take away such rights without compensation. Such, at least, is the rule which seems to us to be supported by the better reason and the weight of authority, although there is much apparent conflict as to the doctrine when applied to the vacation of highways.”
In the main opinion, it is said: “But the clause providing that the road shall remain open, shall be stricken out.” This refers to the road being a public highway. W. 0. Edwards would have a vested right or easement in the road as a private highway.