Fairchild v. City of St. Louis

Decision Date04 March 1889
PartiesFAIRCHILD et al. v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

A municipal corporation is not liable for depreciation in the value of private property caused by permitting a railroad company to place its tracks below grade across the street on which the property is situated, thus deflecting travel from that street to another, but not obstructing access to the property, though rendering it less convenient, as the inability to use the street is a public injury. Following Rude v. City of St. Louis, 6 S. W. Rep. 257. BARCLAY, J., dissenting.

Appeal from St. Louis circuit court, WILLIAM H. HORNER, Judge.

Action by Louisa R. Fairchild and others against the city of St. Louis. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Leverett Bell, for appellant. Muench & Cline, for respondents.

BRACE, J.

The plaintiffs own, and for many years have owned, a lot in St. Louis, on Jefferson avenue, upon which they have two dwelling-houses fronting on said street. Three hundred and fifty feet north of their property the tracks of the Missouri Pacific and the Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Companies cross said street (which runs north and south) in an east and west direction. These tracks were at the grade of the street, and were put down by authority of law. The city built a viaduct or bridge over the tracks at a street recently opened called "East Jefferson Avenue," also running in a general direction north and south between Jefferson avenue and the next street east, which is High street. In November, 1880, the city, by ordinance, gave the railroad companies permission and authority to depress their tracks at Jefferson avenue and High street. This was done to accommodate and conform to a system of bridges which the city was building and expected to build over the railroad tracks, and pursuant to an agreement made by the city and the railroad companies. After the passage of this ordinance, and pursuant to the previous agreement with the city, the railroad companies depressed their tracks at Jefferson avenue and High street, making an excavation across Jefferson avenue about four feet deep, which was subsequently protected by a fence extended across the teamway of the street, thus deflecting the travel in vehicles from that crossing to the bridge at East Jefferson avenue crossing, or to some other bridge or surface crossing of said tracks, and at the time this suit was commenced...

To continue reading

Request your trial
37 cases
  • Johnson v. City of St. Louis
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • July 6, 1909
    ... ... street was made impassable for teams for three years, and the ... plaintiff's property was depreciated in rental value ... thereby and permanently injured; but the Supreme Court of ... Missouri held that he could not recover any damages on this ... account, and so are Fairchild v. City of St. Louis, ... 97 Mo. 85, 11 S.W. 60, and Canman v. City of St ... Louis, 97 Mo. 92, 11 S.W. 60 ... In ... 1891, in Van De Vere v. Kansas City, 107 Mo. 83, 88, ... 91, 17 S.W. 695, 28 Am.St.Rep. 396, the plaintiff owned two ... lots in a residence district adjoining ... ...
  • New, et al. v. So. Davies Co. Drg. Dist.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • April 4, 1949
    ...Realty Co. et al. v. City of St. Louis et al., 30 S.W. 2d 995 (Mo. S. Ct.); Rude v. City of St. Louis, 93 Mo. 408; Fairchild et al. v. City of St. Louis, 97 Mo. 85. (4) There is no uniformity in the application of the general rule by the courts of various states. 105 Pacific 632, l.c. 633; ......
  • Arcadia Realty Co. v. City of St. Louis.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • September 4, 1930
    ...at law for damages or in equity for an injunction. City Charter, Art. XXI, sec. 14; Rude v. City of St. Louis, 93 Mo. 408; Fairchild v. St. Louis, 97 Mo. 85; Canman v. St. Louis, 97 Mo. 92; Van De Vere v. Kansas City, 107 Mo. 83; Glasgow v. St. Louis, 107 Mo. 198; Knapp-Stout & Co. v. St. L......
  • Arcadia Realty Co. v. City of St. Louis
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • September 4, 1930
    ...at law for damages or in equity for an injunction. City Charter, Art. XXI, sec. 14; Rude v. City of St. Louis, 93 Mo. 408; Fairchild v. St. Louis, 97 Mo. 85; Canman v. Louis, 97 Mo. 92; Van De Vere v. Kansas City, 107 Mo. 83; Glasgow v. St. Louis, 107 Mo. 198; Knapp-Stout & Co. v. St Louis,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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