Ireland v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R.R. Co.
| Citation | 79 Mo. 572 |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
| Decision Date | 31 October 1883 |
| Parties | IRELAND et al., Appellants, v. THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILROAD COMPANY. |
Appeal from Jackson Special Law and Equity Court.--HON. R. E. COWAN, Judge.
REVERSED.
Peak & Yeager for appellant.
Gardiner Lathrop for respondent.
This was a suit to enforce against a railroad a claim for materials furnished to and used by the company in the construction and improvement of its road. The action was commenced December 11th, 1879, under and by virtue of sections 3200 to 3216 of the Revised Statutes relating to liens against railroads. The defendant interposed a demurrer, which was sustained on the ground that the petition failed to state a cause of action. Upon the plaintiffs' refusal to plead further, final judgment was rendered in favor of defendant, from which the plaintiffs have appealed.
The decisions of the Supreme Court construing the statute on liens in favor of material men against railroads have been rendered since the judgment in this case.
It is intimated in the brief of appellants that the demurrer was sustained on account of the supposed impossibility of enforcing such liens against a railroad whose road-bed was not wholly within the State. This objection has been disposed of in the case of the St. Louis Bridge & Construction Co. v. M. C. & N. W. R. R. Co., 72 Mo. 664, in which it was held that a lien could be adjudged and enforced against such part of the road-bed as lay within the State. It has also been decided that no lien under this law can be adjudged or enforced against only a part of the road-bed lying within the State. The lien must be adjudged against the whole of the road-bed, or against none of it, within the State. Knapp v. St. Louis, K. C. & N. R'y Co., 74 Mo. 374; Cranston v. Union Trust Co., 75 Mo. 29.
It is argued by counsel for respondent that the suit in this case is against only a section or portion of the road in Missouri, viz: such portion as lies within Jackson county. If the petition disclosed with certainty that the defendant had a road-bed in Missouri outside of Jackson county, this position would have to be sustained. But I do not think it can be inferred satisfactorily that the defendant is possessed of any road-bed or depots in this State outside of Jackson county. The petition alleges that the defendant is a railroad corporation duly incorporated under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Kansas. This fact taken with the name of the road as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bagnell Timber Co. v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas R. Co.
... ... 29; Knapp v ... Railroad, 74 Mo. 374; Ireland v. Railroad, 79 ... Mo. 572; Bethune v. Railroad, 149 ... ...
-
State ex rel. General Mills v. Waltner
... ... defendant in the case of Harry Nance v. The Atchison, Topeka ... and Santa Fe Railway Company, a corporation, ... ...
-
The Gilsonite Construction Company v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company
...expressed against the policy of permitting a railroad to be sold out in detached parcels, were distinctly reasserted." In Ireland v. Railroad, 79 Mo. 572, 573, announce the same doctrine thus: "It is intimated in the brief of appellants that the demurrer was sustained on account of the supp......
-
Storey & Fawcett v. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
...& Pipe Works v. Oconto Water Co., 52 F. 43; Oconto Water Co. v. National Foundry etc. Works, 59 F. 19, 7 C. C. A. 603; Ireland v. Atchison etc. Ry. Co., 79 Mo. 572.) appeals from the judgment of a lower court upon the judgment-roll alone, where there are no bills of exception or statements ......