Tuesday, January 15, 2019
Mikkelsen v. Hansen
Cal.App. 5th Dist. (F072990) 1/10/19
The court, following Scher v. Burke, 3 Cal.5th 136, held that plaintiffs could not establish an implied dedication of a road on non-coastal property because Civil Code Section 1009(b) bars all use of private real property after March 1972, not just recreational use, from ripening into a public dedication absent an express, written, irrevocable offer of such property to such use, and acceptance by a city or county. Scher dealt with an implied-in-law dedication (the period of adverse public use exceeds the period for prescription) and in this case the court held that Scher also applies to implied-in-fact (the period of adverse public use is less than the period for prescription) dedications.