AGO 96-F-016.

• Court: North Dakota

North Dakota Attorney General Opinions 1996. AGO 96-F-016. STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION 96-F-16Date Issued: August 6, 1996Requested by: Merle Torkelson, McLean County State's Attorney- QUESTIONS PRESENTED - I. Whether a section line easement recognized and included in a recorded subdivision plat is subject to the state laws regarding section lines.II. Whether a county commission has the duty to authorize or prohibit obstructions on a section line easement that is recognized in a subdivision plat approved by the county commission and properly recorded pursuant to N.D.C.C. ch. 40-50.1 or former N.D.C.C. ch. 40-50. - ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS - It is my opinion that a section line easement recognized and included in a recorded subdivision plat is not subject to the state laws regarding section line easements for travel; however, it is my further opinion that a road indicated along a section line in a properly recorded subdivision plat is held in trust for public use. It is my opinion that a county commission has the duty to authorize or prohibit obstructions on a section line easement that is recognized in a subdivision plat approved by the county commission and recorded pursuant to N.D.C.C. ch. 40-50.1 or former N.D.C.C. ch. 40-50. - ANALYSES - The questions are in regard to two subdivision plats that were approved by the county commission and recorded pursuant to N.D.C.C. ch. 40-50.1 or former N.D.C.C. ch. 40-50. The relevant facts are as follows: The plats relate to land located in the county and outside of city limits. The issue involves land within 33 feet of a section line which is included on the plats and apparently recognized as the public's section line easement to be used for public travel. On one part of the 33 feet, private party "A" has apparently begun the foundation for a building; the topography of this parcel prohibits vehicular use of the land. Another private party, "B", has planted trees on another portion of the area within 33 feet of the section line. "A" is asking the county commission to give him permission to have an obstruction, in the form of a building, on the area in the plat which is within 33 feet of the section line, or he wants some assurance that he is not going to be required to remove the building in the future. The sons of the original owner of the property whose land was subdivided want the county commission to require both "A" and "B" to remove their respective obstructions. In 1866, the United States Government made an offer of section line easements on public land, and that offer was accepted in 1871 by the Dakota Territory. See Ames v. Rose Township Bd. of Township Supervisors, 502 N.W.2d 845, 847-48 (N.D. 1993). See also Walcott Township of Richland County v. Skauge, 71 N.W. 544, 546, (N.D. 1897); Faxon v. Lallie Civil Township, 163 N.W. 531...