Massachusetts high court hears dispute over whether 1932 discontinuance ended public rights on Concord trail

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Tuesday heard argument in SJC-13721, Town of Concord v. Neil Rasmussen, over whether a 1932 action under a 1924 statute (commonly called —32a—4) legally discontinued a historic way and extinguished the publicright to travel on it. Attorney Gwen King, representing the appellants, told the court: "Before the court today is a question of both how a way becomes public and also how a public way is discontinued and ceases to be public." Town attorney Austin Anderson argued the 1924 provision was aimed at maintenance obligations, saying, "the point of the statute is to discontinue maintenance obligations. It doesn't say anything about public access rights."

The case focuses on three legal questions the court flagged at argument: the effect of a 1932 discontinuance by the Middlesex County commissioners under the 1924 act (section 32a); whether a way may be deemed public based on an otherwise-lost historic layout and circumstantial evidence; and the standard for proving ancient claims of public prescription. Those issues matter for title clarity, municipal maintenance duties and whether…