Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 228
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 228.110 (2026)

Roads may be vacated, how

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  228.110.  Roads may be vacated, how. — 1.  Any twelve residents of the township or townships through which a road runs may make application for the vacation of any such road or part of the same as useless, and the repairing of the same an unreasonable burden upon the district or districts.  The petition shall be publicly read on the first day of the term at which it is presented, and the matter continued without further proceedings until the next term.

  2.  Notice of the filing of such petition and of the road sought to be vacated shall be posted up in not less than three public places in such township or townships, at least twenty days before the first day of the next term of the commission, and a copy of the same shall be personally served on all the persons residing in the district whose lands are crossed or touched by the road proposed to be vacated in the same manner as other notices are required to be served by law; and at the next regular term the same shall again be publicly read on the first day thereof.

  3.  If no remonstrance is made thereto in writing, signed by at least twelve residents of the township, the commission may proceed to vacate such road, or any part thereof, at the cost of the petitioners; but if a remonstrance thereto in writing, signed by at least twelve residents of such township or townships, is filed, and the commission after considering the same shall decide that it is just to vacate such road, or any part thereof, against the vacation of which the remonstrance was filed, the costs shall be paid by the parties remonstrating, and the original costs, and damages for opening such vacated road shall be paid by the petitioners to those who paid the same, except that if five years have elapsed since the original opening of the same no such reimbursement shall be made.

  4.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this section to the contrary, in any county with a charter form of government, any twenty-five residents of the county through which a road subject to this section runs and who reside on any portion of such road or on another road that intersects such road and within one mile of the right-of-way to be vacated, may apply for the vacation of such road or part of such road as no longer serving the public health, safety, and welfare.  The county may, by order or ordinance, provide for notice and hearing of such petitions and for filing and hearing remonstrances against them.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 8482, A.L. 1990 H.B. 1070, A.L. 2007 S.B. 22)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 7836; 1919 § 10634; 1909 § 10445

CROSS REFERENCES:

City streets, how vacated, 71.250 to 71.280

Temporary abandonment to permit mining, limited to certain counties, procedure, 229.420 to 229.450

Vacation of streets in cemeteries, proceedings, 214.060, 214.070

(1957) "Useless" as used in this section is not synonymous with "unnecessary" or "unrequired"; but a finding that a road is of no public utility is necessary to the vacation of a road.  Evidence held insufficient to support vacation order.  Burrows v. County Court Carter Co. (A.), 308 S.W.2d 299.

(1964) Proof of abandonment of public road by showing five or more years of continuous nonuse by public held sufficient in ejectment action and plaintiff did not need to obtain a county court order of abandonment pursuant to section 228.110.  Corbin v. Galloway (A.), 382 S.W.2d 827.

(1966) This section provides only way that title to lands dedicated in perpetual trust and platted for the purpose of establishing streets thereon as they are needed can be abandoned.  State v. Herman (Mo.), 405 S.W.2d 904.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1957–2022 · leading case: Ard v. Shannon Cnty. Comm'n, 424 S.W.3d 468 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ard v. Shannon Cnty. Comm'n, 424 S.W.3d 468 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 13× “The judgment reversed the Commission’s earlier decision to deny a § 228.110 application to vacate the road filed by Margaret Ard and Robert Comely (referred to individually as Ard and Comely, and collectively as Landowners).”
Cooper v. Henry Cnty. Comm'n, 529 S.W.3d 343 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 20× “The Judgment reversed the Commission’s decision to deny a Section 228.110 application, to vacate approximately one mile of County Road 901 and County Road 500 filed by Charles Shannon Cooper (“Cooper”), Stan Hilty (“Hilty”), Stephen Smith (“Smith”), and Rockwell Journey…”
Corbin v. Galloway, 382 S.W.2d 827 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964). · cites it 11× “More precisely, says defendant, once a public road is established the only method by which any reversionary interest can come into being is after a legal closing of the public road by the county court as provided by statute, Section 228.110, and not by mere abandonment of the…”
Coffey v. State Ex Rel. Cnty. of Stone Ex Rel. Hamilton, 893 S.W.2d 843 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 5× “Respondents requested the court to set aside the quitclaim deed to Appellants for failure of the county to comply with § 228.110 3 and to declare that the road is a public road.”
Davis v. St. Charles Cnty., 250 S.W.3d 408 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 6× “*410 Factual and Procedural Background In May 2005, twelve residents (“Petitioners”) of the township through which Koch Road runs filed a petition under Section 228.110 1 for the vacation of two parts of Koch Road.”
Hedges v. Cnty. Court for Ray Cnty., 581 S.W.2d 73 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 4× “The landowners raise two points on appeal, namely, (1) they did not have any remedy by appeal since the Court lacked jurisdiction to make the order vacating the road because it did not follow the procedures under § 228.110 RSMo 1969 and thus, the order was subject to collateral…”
Brehm v. Bacon Twp., 426 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. 2014). · cites it 2× “No such public road shall be abandoned or vacated except through the actions of the county commission declaring such road vacated after public hearing, or through the process set out in section 228.110. § 228.190.2. The summary judgment record shows that Road 2710 met the…”
Ross v. Conco Quarry, Inc., 543 S.W.2d 568 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 3× “110) provides an exclusive method for review of a valid administrative order, and further argue that the circuit court always has jurisdiction to review and remand a void order.”
Burrows v. Cnty. Court of Carter Cnty., 308 S.W.2d 299 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957). · cites it 8× “” See Section 228.110(1). (All statutory references herein are to RSMo 1949, V.”
Burris v. Mercer Cnty., 252 S.W.3d 199 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “The road was used by the public for five continuous years In their first two points, Appellants argue that the road was not in public use for five continuous years and that it was impossible for the road to have been used by the public for five continuous years.”
Przybylski v. Barbosa, 289 S.W.3d 641 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “"A public road can be abandoned in one of two ways: through either a formal vacation accomplished by filing a petition, section 228.110, or nonuse by the public for five years continuously, section 228.”
Seaton v. Weir, 633 S.W.2d 212 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “There is a remedy provided by § 228.110, RSMo 1978, for vacating public roads.”
Show all 22 citing cases →
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 228.110(1): 1 case
Burrows v. Cnty. Court of Carter Cnty., 308 S.W.2d 299 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957). “” See Section 228.110(1). (All statutory references herein are to RSMo 1949, V.”
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.