Ann Hairston v. Danville Western Railway Company
Decision Date | 24 February 1908 |
Docket Number | No. 6,6 |
Citation | 28 S.Ct. 331,208 U.S. 598,52 L.Ed. 637,13 Ann. Cas. 1008 |
Parties | ANN M. HAIRSTON, Plff. in Err., v. DANVILLE & WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This is a writ of error to the highest court of the State of Virginia. The defendant in error is a corporation created by the state of Virginia and operating a railroad entirely within that state. Its main line runs near the town of Martinsville, and from it a branch line runs into Martinsville and there ends. The railway company began a proceeding in a circuit court of that state for the condemnation of land belonging to Miss Hairston, the plaintiff in error, for the construction of a spur track, which was alleged to be needed for the transaction of its business, for the accommodation of the public generally, and for the purpose of reaching the factory of a large shipper, the Rucker & Witten Tobacco Company. By pleadings duly filed the landowner set up the defense (inter alia) that the proposed condemnation was not for a public use, and was therefore contrary to the Constitution and laws of Virginia and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Testimony was taken on this issue before the judge of the circuit court, who found against the contention, and appointed commissioners to ascertain the damage caused by the taking. The commissioners ascertained the amount of the damages. The judge confirmed their report, and ordered that, upon payment of the damages, a fee simple in the land should be vested in the railway company. The landowner petitioned the supreme court of appeals to grant a writ of error to review the judgment of the circuit court. The petition was denied, and a writ of error transferring the record to this court was allowed.
The uses for which the land sought to be condemned was needed are described in the testimony of the superintendent of the railroad. The material parts of it follow:
'Mr. Staples: Will you file that report with your deposition?
'The Witness: Yes, sir.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bilbar Const. Co. v. Board of Adjustment of Easttown Tp.
... 141 A.2d 851 393 Pa. 62 BILBAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF EASTTOWN TOWNSHIP ... Hairston v. Danville & Western Ry. Co., 208 U.S. 598, ... 605, 28 ... 205; ... Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railway Co. v. State of ... Illinois ex rel. Drainage ... ...
-
Pennsylvania Coal Co v. Mahon, 549
...A similar assumption is made in the decisions upon the Fourteenth Amendment. Hairston v. Danville & Western Ry. Co., 208 U. S. 598, 605, 28 Sup. Ct. 331, 52 L. Ed. 637, 13 Ann. Cas. 1008. When this seemingly absolute protection is found to be qualified by the police power, the natural tende......
-
Alabama Power Co. v. Gulf Power Co.
... ... 112, 17 Sup.Ct. 56, 41 L.Ed. 369; ... Hairston v. D. & W. Ry. Co., 208 U.S. 598, 28 ... Sup.Ct. 331, 52 ... ...
-
Goldman v. Crowther
...use without compensation. A similar assumption is made in the decisions upon the Fourteenth Amendment. Hairston v. Danville & W. R. Co., 208 U. S. 598, 605. 52 L. Ed. 637, 639, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 331, 13 Ann. Cas. 1008. When this seemingly absolute protection is found to be qualified by the p......
-
Eminent domain after Kelo v. City of New London: an argument for banning economic development takings.
...another). (105.) See Meidinger, supra note 41, at 30. (106.) 166 U.S. 226, 228 (1897). (107.) Clark v. Nash, 198 U.S. 361 (1905). (108.) 208 U.S. 598, 607 (1908). (109.) Mt. Vernon-Woodberry Cotton Duck Co. v. Ala. Interstate Power Co., 240 U.S. 30, 32 (1916). (110.) 262 U.S. 700, 707 (1923......
-
What's yours can be mine: are there any private takings after Kelo v. City of New London?
...E. SMITH, THE JURISPRUDENTIAL VISION OF JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA 2 (1996) (discussing the assumptions of Lochner era jurisprudence). (57.) 208 U.S. 598 (58.) Id. at 606. (59.) 281 U.S. 439 (1930). (60.) 147 U.S. 282 (1893). (61.) Id. at 390. (62.) Id. at 299-300. (63.) 164 U.S. 112 (1896). (6......
-
Condemnation of low income residential communities under the takings clause.
...(1798). Calder was not an eminent domain case and did not involve compensation. (6.) See, e.g., Hairston v. Danville & Western Ry., 208 U.S. 598 (7.) E.g., 1 N. Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language (1st ed. 1828)(meanings of "use" include "advantage" and "production of b......
-
Eminent domain for private sports stadiums: fair ball or foul?
...(71) See, e.g., Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy R.R. Co. v. Wilson, 17 Ill. 123 (1855); Hairston v. Danville & W. Ry. Co., 208 U.S. 598 (1907); Scudder v. Trenton Del. Falls Co., 1 N.J. Eq. 694 (1832) (water power); Great Falls Mfg. Co. v. Fernald, 47 N.H. 444 (1867) (water power); Fa......