Maryland & P.R. Co. v. Silver

Decision Date20 May 1909
Citation73 A. 297,110 Md. 510
PartiesMARYLAND & P. R. CO. v. SILVER.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hardford County; George L. Van Bibber Judge.

Action by Anna W. Silver against the Maryland & Pennsylvania Railroad Company. From a judgement for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial awarded. This action was brought by the appellee, Anna W. Silver against the appellant, Maryland & Pennsylvania Railroad Company, to recover damages for the depreciation in value of certain lands of the appellee, located in Hartford country at a station on the line of defendant's road about one mile south of the southern boundary of Pennsylvania, known as Cambira, and also to recover damages for the loss of certain rents of a warehouse erected thereon, close to the right of way of the appellee.

The material facts of the case, so far as important to be considered, are, briefly stated as follows:

On March 21, 1884, James R. Whiteford of Hardfod country, being then seized in fee of about 13 acres of land on the Stanford public road in that country, conveyed by deed of that date a strip thereof, containing something more than an acre and a half, to the Maryland Central Railroad Company, its successors and assigns, for railroad purposes only. The consideration named in the deed was the sum of "five dollars and divers other good causes and considerations, them thereunto moving." In the premises the grant was absolute for the purposes aforesaid, but the habendum contained, inter alia, the following: "Subject nevertheless to the following conditions and stipulations, namely: First. The said railroad company shall at once make and maintain on said land herein conveyed a passenger and freight station, where all local trains shall top when flagged by those properly in charge thereof, the passenger trains to receive and deliver passenger and the freight trains to receive and deliver freight." "Fifth. That, so long as the said James R. Whiteford and said company can agree, the said Whiteford shall perform the duties of station agent, if he desires so to do, at the station herein provided to be main trained on the premises above granted." "And the said party of the second part recognizes the full, free and binding effect of the conditions herein contained upon which that a foregoing grant is made, and agrees to accept said grant of land upon the terms set forth above and to comply with all the conditions and obligations imposed by this deed." The deed was executed by the grantor and his wife, and also by the grantee.

At the date of the deed there were no improvements on the 13 acres of land; it being described by one of the witnesses as "an old common." During the same year, or shortly thereafter, the railroad company constructed a railroad on its newly acquired right of way, and about the same time the gaunter erected on his won land, contiguous to the strip conveyed to the railroad company, a large warehouse. Mr. Whiteford also built a dwelling house near the station, for the use of himself and family, also a tenant house. stable, wagon house, corn house, and other necessary outbuildings. he also fened the property and otherwise improved it. Shortly thereafter the railroad company built a station on its right way, and Mr. Whiteford was put in charge as agent for the company. The new station was called Cambira, and Mr. Whiteford continued to serve as resident agent there until 1893. When the position was given to his son William. Who served until December, 1894. Several other persons subsequently served as agents at Cambria for different periods of time, until March 1, 1901, when the resident agent was removed, and the business of the station thereafter handled by the agent at Cardiff, a station on the defendant's road about one mile north of Cambria, near the Pennsylvania line.

The Maryland Central Railroad Company was a Maryland Corporation, originally incorporated by champer 121, p. 174, Acts 1867, and was authorized to construct, equip, and operate a railroad within the state of Maryland, to run from Baltimore northerly through Baltimore and Hardford counties to the southern boundary of pennsylvania. As originally constructed, it was a narrow gauge road and for several years after the making of the deed first above mentioned, of date March 21, 1884, its most northerly station was Cambira. Subsequently, in 1894, the line was extended northward about a mile to within a few yards of the state line and the above-mentioned station of Cardiff established there, with a resident agent in charge. At the same time the York Southern Railroad, a pennsylvania corporation, had its southern terminus at South Delta, a small place a few yards north of the state line, in York county, Pa. About January 1, 1901, these two intrastate railroads we consolidated under the name of the Maryland & Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and it is conceded that the new corporation became entitled to "all the franchises, rights, privileges and properties of the Maryland Central Company and subject to all its duties, obligations and liabilities." After the consolidation of the two roads as above mentioned, the Maryland end was broad gauged to correspond with the Pennsylvania road, and there were then four stations on the line within a distance of two miles of Cambira, to wit, Cambria and Cardiff in Harford county, Md., and South Delta and North Delta in York county, Pa., each station having a resident agent. The business of the road did not justify so many agency stations so near together, and therefore, on March 1, 1901, a central station was established, and the agents at all the other stations mentioned were removed, including the agent at Cambria, though the station itself was maintained, and local trains stopped there to receive and deliver passengers and freight as before.

From 1884 to 1896 Mr. James R. Whiteford carried on a warehouse business at Cambria in the warehouse built by him near the railroad at that place; his business consisting of the purchase and sale of fertilizer, hay, grain, coal, and perhaps of some lumber. On March 11, 1807, James R. Whiteford and wife conveyed by deed the 12 acres of land remaining to him of the way at Cambria to his two sons, William and Marshall, and on March 13, 1899, these two brothers conveyed the property to their sister Anna W. Silver, the appellee in this case. In 1896 James R. Whiteford moved away from Cambria, and the warehouse was rented to a man named Robinson. William Whiteford conducted the business there for Robinson for about two years, but in 1898 or 1899 the business was abandoned, and the warehouse used only for the storage of goods and chattels of different kinds. There is evidence in the record, adduced on the part of the plaintiff to the effect that the property of the plaintiff has greatly depreciated in value by reason of the removal of the resident agent at Cambria, and also that since such removal the warehouse cannot be rented, though with a resident agent there Cambria would be a good business point, and the warehouse could easily e rented for $40 or $50 per month. The defendant, on the other hand, offered evidence tending to show that as a matter of fact the warehouse business at Cambria had never prospered; that at least 2 years before the resident agent was removed, the business at the warehouse had been abandoned, and even the railroad's business at that place had dwindled to such small proportions that the cost of maintaining a resident agent there was equal to 30 per cent. of the total receipts at that station, whereas 5 per cent. was the usual allowance. The trial court refused the plaintiff's claim for damages as to the alleged depreciation in value of the land,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 books & journal articles
  • THE ORIGINS OF REAL COVENANTS: OLD LEGAL DOCTRINES DO NOT DIE THEY MERELY HIBERNATE
    • United States
    • FNREL - Special Institute Midstream Oil and Gas from the Upstream Perspective (FNREL)
    • Invalid date
    ...Owner's Association v. Pine Meadow Ranch Home Association, 2005 UT App 294, 118 P.3d 871. [18] See e.g., Maryland & P.R.R. v. Silver, 110 Md. 510, 73 A. 297 (1909); Lowe v. Wilson, 194 Tenn. 267, 250 S.W.2d 366 (1952); Panhandle & S.F. Railway v. Wiggins, 161 S.W.2d 501 (Tex. Civ. App. 1942......

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