Chicago & A. R. Co. v. Maddox

• Decision Date: 16 May 1887
• Citation: 4 S.W. 417,92 Mo. 469
• Parties: CHICAGO & A. R. CO. v. MADDOX and others.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

4 S.W. 417

92 Mo. 469

CHICAGO & A. R. CO. v. MADDOX and others.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

May 16, 1887.

INJUNCTION — ORDER OF COURT — HIGHWAYS.

In Missouri, the orders of the county court, in proceedings to appropriate property for the purpose of laying out a county road, are subject to remedy by appeal, and an injunction will not lie to restrain the execution of such orders on account of errors in the proceedings.

Appeal from circuit court, Audrain county.

This suit was in equity, to restrain defendants, one of whom was a road overseer, from opening a new county road across plaintiff's railroad, on the ground that no proceedings for establishing the road had been taken against plaintiff or its property; nor had any damages been assessed or paid plaintiff on account of the appropriation of its property and rights. The facts, as they appear upon the record, are that plaintiff had operated its road, and had the same fenced across section 26, township 50, range 9, in Audrain county, since 1869; that the county court of said county, in 1882, upon proceedings had, established a new county road through said section, and across said railroad; that the commissioners appointed to assess damages on account of said road failed to assess damages to plaintiff on account of crossing its track and right of way, nor did they report that plaintiff was not entitled to damages, nor did plaintiff relinquish the right of way, nor was any compensation paid to plaintiff, or to the treasurer to its use. The circuit court held that plaintiff was not entitled to compensation, nor were proceedings against it necessary. Plaintiff's bill was dismissed, and it appealed to this court.

Macfarlane & Trimble, for appellant. T. B. Buckner, for respondents.

SHERWOOD, J.

The plaintiff had no standing in a court of equity to enjoin the defendants from tearing its fences in obediencce to the order of the court lawfully issued. If, as is alleged in the reply, the commissioners appointed for the purpose of assessing damages assessed none to plaintiff, and made no report on the subject of plaintiff's damages, this furnishes no ground for the interposition of a court of equity, for the reason that the statute affords a remedy by granting an appeal; the rule being, as has so often been announced by this court, that, where the law affords a remedy ample and adequate, equity declines to interfere. Shelbina Hotel Ass'n v. Parker, 58 Mo. 327; Kelly v. Hurt, 74 Mo. 561; Bobb v. Graham, 89...