## Facts

- Neighboring landowners in Fort Bend County, Texas disputed access over a 0.899-acre gravel road running north from State Highway 36 toward the Brazos River.
- Daniel D. Grigar owned property north of John Hatton’s tract; the gravel road was the asserted means of ingress and egress for multiple properties.
- Long-time residents testified the road had been openly used for decades by neighboring landowners and members of the public and had a reputation as a public road.
- Evidence showed fencing along much of the road and sporadic, inconsistent county involvement; witnesses disagreed about whether the county maintained the road as public.
- Documentary and survey evidence included deed references to a right-of-way/easement along a defined strip and a 1959 partition deed sketch depicting a passageway.
- After Hatton acquired certain property interests and an easement in 1996, he began refusing Grigar and others access, prompting litigation; Grigar asserted he would otherwise be landlocked.

## Issues

1. Whether the gravel road was a public road by implied dedication under Texas law.
2. If the road was not public, whether Grigar had an easement by necessity, prescription, implication, or estoppel.
3. Whether the trial court properly awarded attorney’s fees under the Texas Declaratory Judgments Act.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment declaring the road a public road by implied dedication.
- The court held the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support implied dedication based on long, continued public use, deed/survey evidence suggesting intended access, and owner acquiescence.
- Because the road was public, the court did not reach alternative easement theories.
- The court affirmed the attorney’s-fee award, finding no abuse of discretion and sufficient evidence that fees were reasonable, necessary, equitable, and just.

## Legal Principles

- A road may become public by implied dedication when the owner’s conduct and surrounding circumstances support an inference of donative intent and the road has been subject to long, uninterrupted public use.
- Long, continued public use can create a presumption of dedication, particularly when the origin of use and original ownership are obscured by time.
- Lack of consistent county maintenance does not defeat implied dedication if other evidence supports public status.
- Implied dedication is a fact question reviewed for legal and factual sufficiency; appellate courts defer to the factfinder on conflicting evidence.
- Under the Texas Declaratory Judgments Act, attorney’s fees may be awarded in the court’s discretion if reasonable and necessary and if the award is equitable and just; review is for abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a declaratory judgment that a longstanding gravel road was a public road by implied dedication, making alternative easement theories unnecessary, and it affirmed an attorney’s-fee award as within the trial court’s discretion under the Declaratory Judgments Act.


Hatton v. Grigar, 66 S.W.3d 545 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.)