Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. Bd. of Pub. Util. Com'rs

• Decision Date: 17 May 1927
• Citation: 137 A. 442
• Parties: LEHIGH VALLEY R. CO. v. BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COM'RS et al.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

137 A. 442

LEHIGH VALLEY R. CO.

v. BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COM'RS et al.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

May 17, 1927.

Application by the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company for a writ of certiorari, with a stay to review an order of the Board of Public Utility Commissioners requiring it to substitute for a grade crossing an underpass on state hihway No. 16 at Royce Valley Station in Somerset county. Allocatur of writ denied.

Argued January term, 1927, before TRENCHARD, KATZENBACH, and KALISCH, JJ.

Hobart & Minard, of Newark, for prosecutor.

John O. Bigelow, of Newark, for the Board.

Clarence E. Case, of Somerville, for Somerset County.

Fred W. De Voe, of New Brunswick, for State Highway Commission.

PARKER, J. The importance of the matter calls for a speedy decision, especially as the allowance of a writ would accomplish little or nothing unless a stay be superadded, the writ, by statute, not carrying a stay ex proprio vigore in these cases; and, on the other hand, if a stay were allowed, an important public work, already delayed too long, would be further postponed.

The grade crossing at Royce Valley is one with which I am familiar, having passed it many times on state highway No. 16. It is a dangerous crossing on an important road, which all parties agree should be eliminated. State Highway No. 16 leads from Somerville to Princeton, and the work of widening it to a uniform width of 66 feet is in progress. The railroad crosses it at an acute angle of 29° 30". Both railroad and highway are straight for some distance; the highway over 3,000 feet south of the railroad, and about 2,000 feet to the north of it. Any underpass means a more or less deep cut. The principal question in dispute before the board was whether this underpass and its incidental cut should be kept straight and on the line of the present road, or, in order to cross under the railroad more nearly at right angles than at present, the highway (as one goes north from Princeton) should be deflected to the right or eastward, then to the left, crossing under the railroad at an angle of some 51°, as I recollect it, then again to the left or westward, and finally to the right, joining the existing road north of the railroad. This would carry the highway to the east of the present station by a double reverse curve of not over 6° at any point. The board rejected this plan offered by the railroad, and, as it appears to me with entire propriety. It is asserted in the affidavits that a 6° curve...