Jacksonville v. Walsh
| Decision Date | 29 March 1883 |
| Citation | 106 Ill. 253,1883 WL 10206 |
| Parties | JACKSONVILLE AND SOUTHEASTERN RAILWAY COMPANYv.MICHAEL H. WALSH. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Morgan county; the Hon. CYRUS EPLER, Judge, presiding.
Messrs. MORRISON, WHITLOCK & LIPPINCOTT, for the appellant:
The “dry claim for the intrinsic value of the property in question” was the true measure of damages in this case. Sedgwick on Measure of Damages, (6th ed.) side page 566; Jacob v. City of Louisville, 9 Dana, 144.
The “just compensation” to Walsh was the actual value of the real estate as it stood, with the improvements and surroundings. 2 Kent, (12th ed.) 340, note.
This court has often held substantially the same rule. Lake Shore and Michigan Southern R. R. Co. v. Chicago and Western Indiana R. R. Co. 100 Ill. 30; Jones v. Chicago and Iowa R. R. Co. 68 Id. 380; Keithsburg and Eastern R. R. Co. v. Henry, 79 Id. 292.
The income from the bar-room and hotel on the premises constituted no part of the case before the jury. Lake Shore and Michigan Southern R. R. Co. v. Chicago and Western Indiana R. R. Co. 100 Ill. 32; Booker v. Venice and Carondelet Ry. Co. 101 Id. 337.
There was no pretense that the property had ever been or was intended for rent, and the rental value, therefore, was not competent evidence. Jones v. Chicago and Iowa R. R. Co. 68 Ill. 380; Booker v. Venice and Carondelet Ry. Co. 101 Id. 337.
Mr. W. H. BARNES, Mr. GEO. W. SMITH, and Mr. OSCAR A. DELEUW, for the appellee, discussed the facts and evidence as to the value of the property sought to be condemned, to show it fully justified the finding of the jury.
To test the compensation for taking the property of Walsh by the selling price in open market, is not just. It would not compensate. It is true the property was worth more in the use he was putting it to than any other. True, it had a special value, and for this he was entitled to compensation. Railroad Co. v. Van Horn, 18 Ill. 258.
This was a proceeding under the Eminent Domain act, to condemn land for railroad purposes. The petition was filed and presented to the circuit judge, and he fixed the time for a hearing on the 12th of August, 1882. On the day thus fixed appellee appeared and filed an answer, denying all the material allegations of the petition. A jury was impaneled, and, at the instance of appellee, they went upon and examined the premises sought to be condemned, before the admission of any evidence. The evidence was heard by the jury, and they found and reported $14,000 as the damages appellee would sustain by taking the property for a depot for the road. Appellant thereupon entered a motion for a new trial, but it was overruled by the judge, and a final order entered on the finding of the jury. The railroad company thereupon prayed and perfected an appeal, and the record is brought to this court, and various errors are assigned.
There can be no plainer proposition than the cash value of the property condemned was the sum appellee was entitled to recover as damages. All legitimate evidence tending to establish that sum was proper, and all evidence that tended to enhance the damages above or reduce them below that sum was illegitimate and improper. The inquiry should have been confined to the market value of the property, and all evidence of the amount of business that was or could be done in it, or the probable profits arising therefrom, was improper, and should have been rejected. The purposes for which it was used and designed, its location and advantages as to situation, were proper matters of consideration by the jury; but the profits of the business of the past, and conjectural profits for the future, were too speculative and uncertain upon which to ascertain the market or cash value of the property. The question was not the value of the property for a short term of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Meyer
...land. Past profits and probable future profits are too conjectural to furnish any basis for determination of value. Jacksonville & S. E. Ry. Co. v. Walsh, 106 Ill. 253, 256; De Buol v. Freeport & M. R. Ry. Co., 111 Ill. 499; Forest Preserve District v. Hahn, 341 Ill. 599, 173 N.E. 763; Rive......
-
Coty of Chicago v. Farwell
...that market value is the measure of compensation. Haslem v. Galena & Southern Wisconsin Railroad Co., 64 Ill. 353;Jacksonville & Southeastern Railway Co. v. Walsh, 106 Ill. 253;Chicago & Evanston Railroad Co. v. Jacobs, 110 Ill. 414;Kiernan v. Chicago, Santa Fé & California Railway Co., 123......
-
City of St. Louis v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
... ... 727; Central Pacific R. R ... Co. v. Pearson, 35 Cal. 247; Pause v. Atlanta, ... 98 Ga. 92, 58 Am. St. 290, 26 S.E. 489; Jacksonville & S ... E. Ry. Co. v. Walsh, 106 Ill. 253; Chicago & ... [266 Mo. 702] Evanston R. R. Co. v. Dressel, 110 ... Ill. 89; DeBuol v. Freeport & ... ...
-
City of Chicago v. Giedraitis
...the owner has expended therein, but rather it is the amount for which the entire property would voluntarily sell. Jacksonville & Southeastern Railway Co. v. Walsh, 106 Ill. 253; Kinter v. United States, 3 Cir., 156 F.2d 5, 172 A.L.R. 232, 244. Furthermore, even were we to consider this as a......