Alton R. Co. v. Illinois Commerce Comm'n ex rel. Mouldingbrownell Corp.

Decision Date15 June 1938
Docket NumberNo. 24531.,24531.
Citation368 Ill. 584,15 N.E.2d 508
PartiesALTON R. CO. v. ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION ex rel. MOULDINGBROWNELL CORPORATION et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Proceedings before the Illinois Commerce Commission between the Moulding-Brownell Corporation and others and the Alton Railroad Company to determine who had the duty of maintaining a switch track. From a judgment affirming an order in favor of the Moulding-Brownell Corporation and others, the railroad appeals.

Affirmed.Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; George W. Bristow, judge.

Silas H. Strawn and Frank H. Towner, both of Chicago, for appellant.

Otto Kerner, Atty. Gen., and Cooke, Sullivan & Ricks and Clarence B. Cardy, all of Chicago (Homer D. Dines, Donovan Y. Erickson, and Harry R. Booth, all of Chicago, Howard C. Knotts, of Springfield, and John P. Barnes, Jr., and Gerson Marks, both of Chicago, of counsel), for appellees.

ORR, Justice.

The Moulding-Brownell Corporation filed a petition with the Illinois Commerce Commission alleging that it was served by a switch track in the city of Chicago connecting with the Chicago & Alton Railroad and that, although it was the duty of the railroad to maintain this track and to pay certain fees imposed by the city of Chicago, the railroad had refused to do so. Petitioners prayed for an order by the commission requiring the railroad to perform its obligations. Subsequently, the Alton Railroad Company filed a petition with the commission alleging that it did not own the track in question and was under no duty to maintain it. This petition asked the commission to rule that it might discontinue service over the track unless the Moulding-Brownell Corporation and the other industries served by it undertook its maintenance. The two cases were consolidated and after several hearings the commission, on March 24, 1937, ordered that the railroad maintain the track in question. This order was affirmed by the circuit court of Cook county and the case is here upon direct appeal under section 69 of the Public Utilities Act, Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, c. 111 2/3, § 73. The commission found that the power of the city of Chicago to impose a charge for maintenance of the track upon the city streets was not before it and hence made no order on that point. Thus we are not called upon to pass upon that issue.

The findings of fact made by the commission, which are not disputed by any of the parties, show that the construction of the switch track involved in this proceeding, and the five spur tracks leading from it, was begun some time before 1884; that except for 150 feet adjacent to the intersection of the switch track and the main line of the railroad, the tracks are located upon property owned by the four industries served; and that the original expense of building these tracks was borne by these companies. In 1904 the petitioning railroad entered into an agreement with the four industries located along this track whereby it agreed to assume the maintenance of the main switch track, shown by the plat to be approximately 4,000 feet in length. This agreement was performed by the railroad until March 26, 1936, when its receiver, appointed by a decree of a federal court, elected not to continue the contract. The spur tracks leading from the switch track into the plants have always been maintained by the respective industries and no question as to their maintenance was raised by the petitions in this case. In 1934, an estimated gross revenue of $40,000 was received by the railroad from the industries served by the switch track. It appears that the average ‘running repair’ on the track has cost about $1,000 per year, although the total outlay will be greater than that sum during the next few years, due to necessary replacements.

The only...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Greenlee Foundry Co. v. Borin Art Products Corp.
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 13 Mayo 1942
    ...Pipe Works, supra, that the purpose is purely a private purpose and the certificate of convenience and necessity issued by the Illinois Commerce Commission is unavailing. Certain cases cited by counsel for the defendant to the effect that a railroad company has a right to build a spur-track......
  • Smithers v. Henriquez
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 15 Junio 1938
    ... ... HENRIQUEZ. No. 24040. Supreme Court of Illinois. April 15, 1938. Rehearing Denied June 15, 1938 ... ...
  • Alton Co v. Illinois Commerce Commission
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 16 Enero 1939
    ...The Illinois supreme court, affirming the circuit court of Cook County, sustained the order as a valid exercise of state power. 368 Ill. 584, 15 N.E.2d 508. Appellees, insisting that our decisions rule that question in their favor, filed a motion to dismiss or affirm.* We postponed consider......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT