Central Branch U. P. R. Co. v. Andrews

• Decision Date: 09 July 1887
• Citation: 14 P. 509,37 Kan. 162
• Parties: THE CENTRAL BRANCH UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. L. A. ANDREWS, et al
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

14 P. 509

37 Kan. 162

THE CENTRAL BRANCH UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. L. A. ANDREWS, et al

Supreme Court of Kansas

July 9, 1887

Error from Atchison District Court.

THE opinion states the nature of the action, and the facts. Judgment for the plaintiffs for $ 3,765.98, at the June Term 1886. The defendant Railroad Company brings the case here.

Judgment affirmed.

B. P Waggener, for plaintiff in error.

Hudson & Tufts, for defendants in error.

HOLT C. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

HOLT, C.:

This action was begun in the court below by R. S. Andrews, on September 13, 1878. This is the fourth time this case has been in this court. (Railroad Co. v. Andrews, 26 Kan. 702; 30 id. 590; 34 id. 564.) It was last tried in September, 1886, before W. D. W., judge pro tem., and a jury, and the verdict and judgment were for the plaintiffs, for $ 3,765.98. Plaintiff in error, defendant below, now seeks a reversal of that judgment. For a statement of facts, see Railroad v. Andrews, 26 Kan. 702, and Railroad v. Andrews, 30 id. 590. The plaintiff in error makes quite a number of assignments of error, a part only of which we shall consider in the examination of this case. It contends that the allegation in plaintiffs' petition of the appointment of plaintiffs as administrators of the estate of R. S. Andrews, deceased, is not sufficiently explicit. The allegation is as follows:

"First: That said R. S. Andrews died, in Atchison county, Kansas, upon March 9, 1883; and thereafter, and upon March 13, 1883, said L. A. Andrews and B. F. Hudson were, by the probate court of Atchison county, Kansas, being duly and legally authorized thereto, duly and legally appointed administrators of the estate of said R. S. Andrews, deceased, and letters of administration duly and legally issued to them as such out of and by said court, and that they thereupon duly and legally qualified as such administrators, and have ever since been and now are the duly and legally authorized, appointed, qualified, and acting administrators of the estate of R. S. Andrews, deceased."

This is sufficient. It is a brief and direct statement of the facts, in ordinary and concise language.

Another error complained of is, that witnesses were allowed to testify as experts to the value of the lots abutting upon the alley immediately after the railroad track was laid down through it. They had been asked simply whether they knew the market value of the lots in question on or about August 1, 1877. It appears that the track was laid down in a very short time--in a few hours--about August 1, 1877. We believe from their answers that they had knowledge of the market values of the lots in question on or about August 1, 1877, and that they were sufficiently qualified to answer in regard to their value, both before the laying down of the track, as well as immediately afterward. The time of the laying down of the track was so brief, and the question asked, limiting it to "on or about," is broad enough in our opinion to permit the testimony to be introduced.

Another objection urged is, in allowing A. J. North to give his opinion of the value of said property. He was asked whether he knew the market value of the lots in question, and he replied that he did not know the real value; but after some hesitation, upon further examination he said that he had an opinion of their market value. It further appears in the testimony that he had been dealing in land...