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

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 228.190 (2026)

Roads legally established, when

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  228.190.  Roads legally established, when — deemed abandoned, when — roads deemed public county roads, when. — 1.  All roads in this state that have been established by any order of the county commission, and have been used as public highways for a period of ten years or more, shall be deemed legally established public roads; and all roads that have been used as such by the public for ten years continuously, and upon which there shall have been expended public money or labor for such period, shall be deemed legally established roads; and nonuse by the public for five years continuously of any public road shall be deemed an abandonment and vacation of the same.

  2.  From and after January 1, 1990, any road in any county that has been identified as a county road for which the county receives allocations of county aid road trust funds from or through the department of transportation for a period of at least five years shall be conclusively deemed to be a public county road without further proof of the status of the road as a public road.  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.

  3.  In any litigation where the subject of a public road is at issue under this section, an exact location of the road is not required to be proven.  Once the public road is determined to exist, the judge may order a survey to be conducted to determine the exact location of the public road and charge the costs of the survey to the party who asserted that the public road exists.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 8485, A.L. 1953 p. 674, A.L. 2006 S.B. 932, A.L. 2007 S.B. 22)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 7839; 1919 § 10635; 1909 § 10446

(1952) This statute requires that for ten consecutive years sufficient public money or labor should be expended on the road to keep it in substantial repair and in condition for public use and public travel. Evidence reviewed and held not sufficient to establish that there had been a public road over a certain piece of land. Sellers v. Swehla (A.), 253 S.W.2d 847.

(1952) Evidence reviewed and held insufficient to establish a public road under this section. George v. Crosno (A.), 254 S.W.2d 30.

(1953) No public highway could be established by prescription since 1887 unless public money or labor had been expended thereon. Leslie v. Mathewson (A.), 257 S.W.2d 394.

(1956) When public road became legally established by virtue of public use and expenditure of public money, the public's right of use cannot be divested except upon abandonment for nonuse by the public as prescribed by § 228.190. State ex rel.  Carter County v. Lewis (A.), 294 S.W.2d 954.

(1956) Evidence insufficient to establish public road by prescription.  Cook v. Bolin (A.), 296 S.W.2d 181.

(1957) Evidence held insufficient to establish that public money had been expended on road for time required to establish its existence as public road. Jenkins v. German (A.), 298 S.W.2d 486.

(1959) Where county court record of proceedings establishing and subsequent widening of a road did not affirmatively show that notice thereof was given to owners of land over which road would run, the proceedings were void. Greene v. St.  Louis County (Mo.), 327 S.W.2d 291.

(1961) Street in unincorporated area dedicated under section 445.070 would not be deemed abandoned under section 228.190 by nonuse but could only be vacated in accordance with proceedings set out in section 71.270. Winschel v. County of St. Louis (Mo.), 352 S.W.2d 652.

(1962) This section does not require that public money or labor shall be expended every year for ten-year period, but that it shall have been expended from time to time during any ten-year period sufficient to maintain the road in reasonably good condition for public travel. Evidence held sufficient to establish public road. Liberty Township of Stoddard County v. Telford (Mo.), 358 S.W.2d 842.

(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 applies to public roads, not to streets and alleys. Roseman v. Adams (Mo.), 398 S.W.2d 855.

(1966) This section does not apply to title of lands voluntarily conveyed in trust to be used for the purpose of establishing streets thereon as they shall be needed as lands so dedicated in perpetual trust and platted for such purposes can be abandoned only by formal vacation by an order of the county court. State v. Herman (Mo.), 405 S.W.2d 904.

(1966) This section does not exclude or except public roads paid for by public funds and required by condemnation. State v. Herman (Mo.), 405 S.W.2d 904.

(1967) Creation of public road under this section was valid although road created was only 18 to 20 feet wide and section 229.010 requires that public roads shall not be less than 30 feet in width. Drydale v. Kiser (Mo.), 413 S.W.2d 506.

(1969) Without the expenditure of public funds and labor over the statutory period, the mere fact of some use of a tract of land as a convenient cutoff in leaving and entering a public highway was not sufficient alone to convert private property into a public road. Mackey v. Weakley (A.), 439 S.W.2d 219.

(2005) Road created by implied or common law dedication is subject to section's provision of abandonment through nonuse.  Kleeman v. Kingsley, 167 S.W.3d 198 (Mo.App.S.D.).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 74 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1952–2024 · leading case: Sheedy v. Missouri Highways & Transp. Comm'n, 180 S.W.3d 66 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sheedy v. Missouri Highways & Transp. Comm'n, 180 S.W.3d 66 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 34× “Relying on § 228.190, the Sheedys claimed the Commission had abandoned its easement through five years of nonuse.”
Shapiro Bros., Inc. v. Jones-Festus Props., L.L.C., 205 S.W.3d 270 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 21× “Specifically, Shapiro Brothers contends the trial court erroneously relied on Section 228.190, RSMo 2000, 3 in finding that the easement area had to be maintained by the public in order for there to be a public prescriptive easement.”
Karashin v. Haggard Hauling & Rigging, Inc., 653 S.W.2d 203 (Mo. 1983). · cites it 14× “A public road may be established in three ways: Under section 228.190 RSMo 1978; by prescription; or by implied or common law dedication.”
Przybylski v. Barbosa, 289 S.W.3d 641 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 58× “A public road may be established in three ways: (1) under section 228.190, RSMo; (2) by prescription; or (8) by implied or common law dedication.”
Kleeman v. Kingsley, 167 S.W.3d 198 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 30× “This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Lawrence County’s judgment pursuant to section 228.190, determining that a certain portion of a strip of land located in Lawrence County has been abandoned and vacated as a public road.”
Ankrom v. Roberts, 126 S.W.3d 798 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 21× “Section 228.190 RSMo. states that: “non use by the public for five years continuously of any public road shall be deemed an abandonment and vacation of the same.”
Burris v. Mercer Cnty., 252 S.W.3d 199 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 24× “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. A public road…”
Brehm v. Bacon Twp., 426 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. 2014). · cites it 11× “Section 228.190, RSMo 1986, now codified as section 228.”
Winschel v. Cnty. of St. Louis, 352 S.W.2d 652 (Mo. 1961). · cites it 25× “The trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law indicate that its judgment was based upon the finding that Third Avenue had been abandoned by reason of nonuser by the public for at least five years continuously under the provisions of Section 228.190 RSMo 1959 and…”
Patterson v. Null, 751 S.W.2d 381 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 10× “Patterson contends the judgment is not supported by competent and substantial evidence, is against the weight of the evidence, and erroneously applies the law because, as a matter of law, the width of a road established under § 228.190, 1 as a result of public use and…”
Sharp v. Crawford, 313 S.W.3d 193 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 9× “On November 10, 2008, Appellants filed a petition for declaratory judgment pursuant to section 228.190, RSMo Cum.Supp.2007, against the Commissioners.”
Wilson v. Sherman, 573 S.W.2d 456 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 14× “The trial court, sitting without a jury, found the disputed road to be a “public roadway by virtue of § 228.190,” 1 and decreed that it was “available for use by all members of the public without interference or obstruction.”
Show all 74 citing cases →
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.