Meacham v. Louisville & N.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 19 March 1943
• Citation: 293 Ky. 642
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
• Parties: Meacham v. Louisville & N.R. Co.

293 Ky. 642

Meacham v. Louisville & N.R. Co.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 19, 1943.

1. Contracts. — In construing a contract, court must determine intention of parties from contract as a whole and give it such interpretation as will carry out such intent, and in so doing court may consider subject matter of contract, object to be accomplished, situation of parties, and their surrounding conditions.

2. Railroads. — Right of way deed reciting that it was given in consideration of erection and maintenance "forever" at some point on premises of a switch which would be a flag station where grantors, their heirs and assigns, could load and unload freight and the dismissal of a condemnation proceeding railroad had instituted disclosed intent that railroad would maintain switch and flag station so long as line existed.

3. Railroads. — A railroad, although a private corporation, is a

"quasi-public agency" so that one contracting with it must contemplate that when public necessity and convenience require abandonment of a particular part of its line, railroad may not be bound by a contract to operate that line in perpetuity.

4. Railroads. — Under authority of Interstate Commerce Commission to find facts and determine whether an abandonment of a railroad line is consistent with public convenience and necessity, where commission ordered abandonment of line over plaintiff's land, there was no "voluntary abandonment" of line by railroad so as to authorize action for damages for breach of term of right of way deed by which railroad agreed to maintain flag stop and switch on plaintiff's premises, notwithstanding that railroad petitioned commission for authority to abandon (Interstate Commerce Act, sec. 1 (18, 19), 49 U.S.C.A. sec. 1 (18, 19).

5. Railroads. — Contracts with railroads regarding right of way are subject to law of the sovereign, and such contractual obligations cannot be extended to defeat legitimate governmental authority.

6. Railroads. — Where railroad was prevented from carrying out agreement in right of way deed to maintain switch and flag stop on plaintiff's premises by interstate commerce commission order directing abandonment of line, and railroad did not seek to retain benefit received and offered to return right of way to plaintiff, railroad was not obligated to compensate plaintiff for loss of switch and flag stop (Interstate Commerce Act, sec. 1 (18, 19), 49 U.S.C.A. sec. 1 (18, 19).

7. Railroads. — In action against railroad for breach of an agreement in right of way deed to maintain switch and flag stop on plaintiff's premises, plea that railroad had abandoned line and switch under an order of interstate commerce commission stated a good defense (Interstate Commerce Act, sec. 1 (18, 19), 49 U.S.C.A. sec. 1 (18, 19).

Appeal from Union Circuit Court.

Welborn B. Harris and G.I. Drury for appellant.

King, Flournoy & Ruark and H.T. Lively for appellee.

Before M.L. Blackwell, Judge.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE SIMS.

Affirming.

The appellant, Mrs. Annie Hamner Meacham, sued appellee, Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, for $10,000 damages alleged to have been done her farm when the company removed its tracks and a switch from lands her predecessors in title had conveyed the grantee as a right-of-way. The answer denied the damages and affirmatively averred in a second paragraph that it was a common carrier engaged in interstate commerce and that the Interstate Commerce Commission ordered it to abandon this particular part of its line, which was a branch between Clay, Kentucky, and Morganfield, Kentucky. By a third paragraph the company offered to quitclaim the right-of-way to the plaintiff. The court overruled a demurrer to the second paragraph of the answer, plaintiff declined to plead further, and her petition was dismissed.

In 1905 plaintiff's parents and predecessors in title, W.E. Hamner and wife, conveyed by a general warranty deed to the Morganfield & Atlanta Railroad Company, hereinafter referred to as the M. & A., an 80 foot right-of-way through their farm. The deed recited the consideration for the right-of-way, which consisted of 7.66 acres, was the agreement by the M. & A. to erect and forever (our italics) maintain at some point on the premises a switch to be called Hamner, which would be a flag station where the grantors, their heirs and assigns, could load and unload freight. The grantee also was to maintain a fence on both sides of the right-of-way, and agreed to dismiss and pay all costs of a condemnation proceeding it had instituted.

The M. & A. operated its trains over this track until 1921, when the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company purchased the line. In 1939 the latter company obtained an order from the Interstate Commerce Commission under paragraphs 18 and 19, Section 1, of the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C.A. Section 1 (18, 19), authorizing it to abandon that portion of its branch line extending from Clay, Kentucky, to Morganfield, Kentucky, as public convenience and necessity no longer required its operation. After due notice this branch line was abandoned, the track and switch removed, and in 1940 Mrs. Meacham instituted this action.

It is insisted by plaintiff that under the deed conveying the right-of-way to the M. & A., that railroad and its successors were obligated to erect and maintain forever this switch; that the L. & N., as successor in title to the M. &. A., was not forced to abandon this line but voluntarily sought and obtained permission to do so...