(1) After the public hearing described in section 39-1724, the county board shall, by resolution at its next meeting or as soon thereafter as may be practicable, vacate or abandon or refuse vacation or abandonment, as in the judgment of the board the public good may require.
(2) Vacation and abandonment shall not be ordered except upon vote of two-thirds of all members of the county board and the prior approval of the governing body of a city of the metropolitan, primary, or first class has been obtained when any public road or any part thereof is within the area of the zoning jurisdiction of such city. If such road lies within a township in a county operating roads on a township basis, the road shall not be vacated or abandoned unless an offer has been made to relinquish to the township in the manner provided in section 39-1726.
(3) In the event that the county board decides to vacate or abandon a public road, its resolution shall state upon what conditions, if any, the vacation or abandonment shall be qualified and particularly whether or not the title or right-of-way to any vacated or abandoned fragment or section of road shall be sold, revert to private ownership, or remain in the public. If the county board fails to specify in a resolution as to the disposition of right-of-way, and if there shall be nonuse of such right-of-way for any public purpose for a continuous period of not less than ten years, the right-of-way shall revert to the owners of the adjacent real estate, one-half on each side of such road.
(4) When the county vacates all or any portion of a road, the county shall, within thirty days after the effective date of the vacation, file a certified copy of the vacating resolution with the register of deeds for the county to be indexed against all affected lots.
Notes of Decisions
Carter v. State, Dept. of Roads, 254 N.W.2d 390 (Neb. 1977).
· cites it 2× “The present statute on vacation or abandonment of county roads, section 39-1725, R. R. S. 1943, a part of a general 1957 revision of laws pertaining to the establishment, acquisition, and vacation or abandonment of county roads, appears to give the county board broad and varying…”
Sanitary & Improvement Dist. No. 2 v. Cnty. of Stanton, 567 N.W.2d 115 (Neb. 1997).
“See § 39-1725. We hold that in the absence of abandonment, vacation, or relinquishment of the roads, the county retains the statutory authority to supervise, control, improve, and maintain the roads at issue in this case.”
Jameson v. Plischke, 165 N.W.2d 373 (Neb. 1969).
· cites it 2× “The motion in question was passed November 29, 1966, by the county board of supervisors of Buffalo County and.was recorded in the miscellaneous records of the office of the register of deeds of said county on November 21, 1966.”
State Ex Rel. Goossen v. Bd. of Supervisors, 251 N.W.2d 655 (Neb. 1977).
· cites it 2× “1943, depends upon the availability of suffi- ' cient funds to permit the program of improvement and maintenance of rural mail routes.”
Emry v. Lake, 149 N.W.2d 520 (Neb. 1967).
· cites it 2× “(2) Section 39-1725, R. R. S. 1943, authorizing the *569 board to relocate roads, is unconstitutional in that plaintiff had no right of appeal.”
Plischke v. Jameson, 146 N.W.2d 223 (Neb. 1966).
· cites it 2× “The court also found that by action of the county board both roads were vacated in 1963, that no provision was made as to the disposition of the land covered by either road, and that under the provisions of section 39-1725, R. R. S. 1943, title thereto remains in Buffalo' County…”
Camp Clarke Ranch v. MORRILL Cnty. BD., 758 N.W.2d 653 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 39-1725 (Reissue 2004) then provides that after a public hearing, the board shall by resolution "vacate or abandon or refuse vacation or *656 abandonment, as in the judgment of the board the public good may require.”
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.