Maryland case law › Richardson v. Davis

Richardson v. Davis

91 Md. 390 (1900) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: AffirmedBriscoe✓ Good law
HoldingBellese Davis filed a bill in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County seeking an injunction to restrain the appellants, Richardson and others, from maintaining a gate and fence across the bed of a portion of Morris avenue in Lutherville, Baltimore County, and to compel removal of obstructions.

Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellee, Bellese Davis, filed a bill in this case in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County for an injunction to restrain and prohibit the appellants, the defendants below, from maintaining a gate and fence across the bed of a portion of Morris avenue, in Lutherville, Baltimore County, and also from interfering with the free use of this avenue by the plaintiff, or by any other person desiring to use it. The bill also prays for a mandatory injunction to require and compel the defendant to remove the gate, fence and all other obstructions erected by them across the bed of the avenue. The case was originally heard on bill and answer, and on the loth of July, 1899, the Court held that the avenue had been dedicated to the public use, but in consequence of an allegation that another avenue had been, in the year 1866, by common consent, opened and substituted in the place and stead of Morris avenue, the bill of complaint was retained for further proceedings.

The case was subsequently heard on bill, answer and proof, and this appeal is from a decree of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, dated the 21st of December, 1899, declaring that the bed of Morris avenue was dedicated to the public use as a street, and directing an injunction prohibiting the maintaining of all obstructions now in the bed thereof, and further granting a mandatory injunction requiring the removal of the gate, fence and all other obstructions which had been erected by the defendants across or in the bed of the avenue. There can be but little controversy as to the question of dedication, raised by the pleadings and facts of this case. It is admitted that Morris avenue was laid out on a map or 396 plat of Lutherville as far back as August 24th, 1854, by the Trustees of the Lutherville Female Seminary of Baltimore County. The plat or plan divided the property into lots and upon this plat Morris avenue was laid out by the then owners of the land and extended as a public street or avenue.

Besides this, it appears from the deed itself, under which the appellant claims title, that the Trustees of the Lutherville Female Seminary of Baltimore County expressly reserved the right and use of so much of the lot of land as may be required to lay out, open and extend the avenues, streets and alleys designated on the plat of the whole tract of land called Lutherville; the avenues, streets and alleys are to be laid out and opened for the use and benefit in common of the owners- and occupants of lots now sold or hereafter to be sold in the village of Lutherville. Now, the law on the subject of dedication has been repeatedly laid down by this Court to be that where an owner lays off

This is a preview of Richardson v. Davis. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.