Fayetteville & Little Rock Ry. Co. v. Hunt

• Decision Date: 13 April 1889
• Citation: 11 S.W. 418
• Parties: FAYETTEVILLE & LITTLE ROCK RY. CO. <I>v.</I> HUNT.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

11 S.W. 418

FAYETTEVILLE & LITTLE ROCK RY. CO.

v.HUNT.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

April 13, 1889.

Appeal from circuit court, Washington county; J. M. PITTMAN, Judge.

B. R. Davidson, E. D. Kenna, and E. C. O'Day, for appellant.J. D. Walker, for appellee.

COCKRILL, C. J.

In a proceeding by a railway to condemn a right of way, the assessment of damages is not necessarily restricted to the injury done to the legal subdivision of land described in the petition.If the tract described is a part of a larger connected body of land, the owner may recover for the injury done to the tract as a whole.If the tract traversed by the road is part of a farm, its use as such is notice to the company that an injury to a part impairs the value of the whole, for the farm is a unit.It is not necessary, therefore, in such a case, that the owner should file an answer claiming compensation for the damages done to the residue of the tract in order to apprise the company what it is expected to pay for.Railway Co. v. Doran, 15 Minn. 235, (Gil. 179;)Cummins v. Railway Co., 63 Iowa, 397, 19 N. W. Rep. 268;Hartshorn v. Railway Co., 52 Iowa, 613, 3 N. W. Rep. 648.It is incumbent upon the company to pay for the direct injury caused by the building of the road.The statute imposes upon it the duty of filing a petition to adjust the damages, and, when it inaugurates the statutory proceeding, the presumption is that it will perform its whole duty, and there is no necessity for an answer by the land-owner,...