Any municipality whose duty it is to maintain the highways within its limits may, at any annual or special meeting held for that purpose, accept as a public highway any proposed highway situated in such municipality, provided any municipality in which a town meeting is the legislative body may by ordinance or resolution delegate the power to accept public highways to the board of selectmen in accordance with such procedures as the municipality may establish in the ordinance or resolution, and any municipality may, by charter, provide an alternative means for the acceptance of public highways.
(1949 Rev., S. 2118; 1958 Rev., S. 13-3; 1963, P.A. 226, S. 48; P.A. 91-181, S. 1, 3.)
History: 1963 act replaced previous provisions: See title history; P.A. 91-181 added provision concerning acceptance of highways by boards of selectmen and establishment of alternative means for acceptance.
Acceptance by user by the public. 131 C. 84. When municipality in conformity with statutory requirements expressly accepts street as public highway, no further action on part of general public is required to constitute street a public highway. 146 C. 474. Sec. 13a-71 does not limit width of street that can be accepted. 151 C. 372. A town meeting may accept any street as a public highway irrespective of whether it has received prior approval by selectmen. 159 C. 107. Cited. 165 C. 624. Acceptance of highways is an exercise of legislative discretion that may not be delegated; whole action of town meeting a nullity, not just the illegal delegation; acceptance subject to approval not considered acceptance. 177 C. 527. Neither the public's actual use of the property nor the town's actions constituted an express or implied acceptance of a proposed street. 180 C. 274. Acceptance by municipality may be accomplished through formal proceedings under section or by implication through its conduct. Id., 435. Cited. 226 C. 684.
Cited. 14 CA 521; 17 CA 111; 23 CA 281. In 1730, highways were established by actual use by the general public under the common-law doctrine of dedication and acceptance, and section, which was enacted in 1927, does not allow municipalities to accept such highways. 137 CA 1.
Notes of Decisions
Montanaro v. Aspetuck Land Trust, Inc., 48 A.3d 107 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012).
· cites it 7× “Since 1927, General Statutes § 13a-48 8 has regulated the acceptance of highways by municipalities, or the proper authorities.”
Marchesi v. Bd. of Selectmen of the Town of Lyme, 181 A.3d 531 (Conn. 2018).
· cites it 4× “2d 899 (holding that acceptance of highway under General Statutes § 13a-48 was "exercise of legislative power" that could not be delegated to selectmen by town's legislative council and town meeting).”
Hamann v. Town of Newtown, 541 A.2d 899 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988).
· cites it 6× “The board is without authority under that section to determine the legal status of a road. The determination of the legal status of a road is distinct from a determination of the boundaries of a road.”
A & H Corp. v. City of Bridgeport, 430 A.2d 25 (Conn. 1980).
· cites it 2× “Similarly, acceptance by the municipality may be accomplished through formal proceedings; see General Statutes § 13a-48; or, by implication, through its conduct.”
Meshberg v. Bridgeport City Trust Co., 429 A.2d 865 (Conn. 1980).
· cites it 2× “The intention of the defendant bank, which was the record owner, to dedicate the land in question was evidenced by its filing of the 1939 subdivision map in 1939 with the designation of “Judson Street.”
Prop. Grp., Inc. v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 628 A.2d 1277 (Conn. 1993).
“General Statutes *696 § 13a-48; see E. Sostman & J. Anderson, “The Highway and the Right of Way: An Analysis of the Decisional Law in Connecticut Concerning Public, Private and Proposed Roads From Establishment to Abandonment,” 61 Conn.”
Morris v. Congdon, 893 A.2d 413 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 2× “Prior to 1963, General Statutes § 13-3, now codified at General Statutes § 13a-48, provided that “[a]ny municipality .”
Country Life Props. v. Town of Essex, 580 A.2d 75 (Conn. App. Ct. 1990).
· cites it 6× “” It contends that the court found that the town had expressly accepted the entire roadway because no finding was made of implied acceptance by either the town or the general public.”
Lynch v. Town of West Hartford, 355 A.2d 42 (Conn. 1974).
· cites it 2× “The town does not argue that it ever formally accepted the Rose Avenue extension in accordance with statutory requirements; 2 see General Statutes § 13a-48; nor does the town allege compliance with the requirements of General Statutes § 13a-71, pertaining to the layout of…”
Benjamin v. City of Norwalk, 153 A.3d 669 (Conn. App. Ct. 2016).
“to 1966] § 13a-48) gave specific authority to a municipality at any annual or special meeting held for that purpose to accept as a public highway any street or highway situated in the municipality.”
Thompson v. Town of Portland, 266 A.2d 893 (Conn. 1970).
· cites it 3× “to 1966] § 13a-48) gave specific authority to a municipality at any annual or special meeting held for that purpose to accept as a public highway any street or highway situated in the municipality.”
Bankers Trust Co. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 345 A.2d 544 (Conn. 1974).
· cites it 2× “1949, presently General Statutes § 13a-48. On June 24, 1955, the zoning regulations were amended further to provide a definition for “lot” or “plot,” which definition, inter alia, described a “lot” or “plot” as a parcel not divided by a river, public highway or private road or…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.