Pfaff v. The Terre Haute And Indianapolis Railroad Co.
| Citation | 9 N.E. 93,108 Ind. 144 |
| Decision Date | 05 November 1886 |
| Docket Number | 11,258 |
| Parties | Pfaff, Auditor, et al. v. The Terre Haute and Indianapolis Railroad Company |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
From the Marion Superior Court.
The judgment is affirmed, at appellant's costs.
C. S Denny, W. W. Woollen and I. Klingensmith, for appellants.
B Harrison, C. C. Hines, W. H. H. Miller and J. B. Elam, for appellee.
Appellee owns, and for a number of years has owned, some small tracts of land, and some lots and parts of lots in the city of Indianapolis, aggregating about twelve acres. The purposes for, and the manner in which those lands and lots are and have been used, are stated in the complaint as follows:
"Plaintiff shows, that upon the above described portion of block 94, is situated its freight house, through which two tracks run, and on each side of which there are tracks belonging to plaintiff, connected with its main line of track situate on Louisiana street in said city of Indianapolis; that upon said part of out-lot 135, plaintiff has constructed a round-house for its locomotives, a small shop for repairing locomotives a coal shed, a wood shed, and some water-tanks; that the balance of said out-lot 135, together with all the other real estate above described, except a portion of block 94, is occupied by the main track, and side tracks of this plaintiff, and is used exclusively for track purposes."
It is further alleged in the complaint, that in 1880 and 1881, the railroad company made return of its main track, and all of said side tracks upon the said lands and lots, to the State board of equalization, and that that board valued and assessed the same for taxation, consisting of 56/100 of a mile of main, and eight 15/100 miles of side tracks, including the lands and lots upon which they were situated, and all the improvements thereon, as "railroad track;" that upon the valuation thus made by the State board, the respective officers of Marion county, and of the city of Indianapolis, extended all taxes levied by the county and city respectively, and that the taxes so levied had been paid.
It is still further alleged, that notwithstanding the assessment as above stated, and the payment of the taxes, the county and city, by their local assessors and officers in each of said years, made an assessment of the above described lots and lands, together with the improvements, and levied taxes thereon, claiming that they are not included in the term "railroad track," and that, therefore, they may be assessed and taxed by the county and city authorities as other lands are assessed.
The railroad company having refused to pay the taxes so assessed by the local authorities, the lots and lands were sold by those authorities. This action against the proper city and county officers, and the purchaser at the tax sale, is to enjoin the execution of a deed to the purchaser, to enjoin any further attempt to collect such taxes, and to quiet its title to the lots and lands.
The question presented by the record is, are the lots and lands so occupied with tracks, side tracks, and buildings, to be valued and assessed by the State board of equalization as "railroad track," or may they be valued and assessed by the county and city authorities as other lands are assessed?
The answer to this question is dependent upon the construction to be given to our revenue laws. As there is no material difference between the revenue acts of 1872 and 1881, so far as they affect the question under examination, we shall make reference only to the act of 1881, and to the sections as numbered in R. S. 1881.
It is very plain, that under the revenue acts, the State board of equalization alone has authority to value and assess the railroad property, denominated "railroad track" and "rolling stock." Section 6410.
The important question here is, what is included in the term "railroad track?" Does that term include the lands described in the complaint, being small tracts of land and lots which are occupied by the side tracks, turnouts, round-house, a small repair shop, coal and wood sheds, water-tanks and turn-tables, etc.?
Section 6362 provides, that "Such right of way, including the superstructures, main track, side or second tracks, and turnouts, turn-tables, telegraph poles, wires, instruments, and other appliances, and the stations and improvements of the railroad company on such right of way (except machinery, stationary engines, and other fixtures, which shall be considered personal property), shall be held to be real estate for the purpose of taxation, and denominated 'railroad track,' and shall be so listed and valued, and shall be described in the assessment thereof as a strip of land extending on each side of such railroad track, and embracing the same, together with all the stations and improvements thereon, commencing at a point where such railroad track crosses a boundary line in entering the county, township, city, or town, tending to the point where such track crosses the boundary line leaving such county, township, city, or town to the point of termination in the same, as the case may be, containing ----- acres, more or less (inserting name of county, township, city, or town, or boundary line of same, and number of acres and length in feet); and when advertised or sold for taxes, no other description shall be necessary to convey a good title to the purchaser."
This section provides, that the right of way, with whatever is upon it in the way of improvements, is to be valued and assessed as "railroad track."
If a depot building, round-house, machine shop, coal or wood sheds, or water-tank, is upon the right of way, they become a part of the "railroad track," and are to be valued and assessed by the State board of equalization, and can not be valued and assessed by the county or city authorities, as separate and apart from the "railroad track."
The more specific inquiry here is, do the lots and lands described in the complaint, and occupied as therein described, constitute a part of the right of way?
The term "right of way" is not limited by any statutory definition, nor by any statutory provision, to a strip of land of any particular and definite width at all points on the line of the railroad. As applied to a railroad company, it means a way over which the company has the right to pass in the operation of its trains. Williams v. Western, etc., R. W. Co., 50 Wis. 71, 76, 5 N.W. 482.
A railroad can not be operated with anything like success with a single track. It is necessary to have either a double track, or turnouts and side tracks, in order that trains going in opposite directions may pass. It is just as necessary that there shall be turnouts and side tracks for the making up of trains, the changing of engines, the replenishing of them with water and fuel, and the loading and unloading of freight.
With many of the more important lines, it is often necessary to have many of such turnouts and side tracks, in order that the business may be done with dispatch, in obedience to the demands of commerce and traffic. These side tracks, such as are required at commercial centers, and the larger cities and towns, could not be crowded upon a narrow strip of land, such as may be sufficient between stations. In order that the company may have the requisite amount of such side tracks at such points, it is necessary that it shall have a right of way over a sufficient amount of land upon which to lay and operate them. This right of way the company may acquire by condemnation proceedings, if necessary, R. S. 1881, section 3907.
When such right of way is acquired, by whatever means, the land thus acquired becomes a part of the company's right of way, and thus a part of the "railroad track," as much as that portion occupied by the main track. It seems reasonable, therefore, that the person, or body of persons, who value and assess the one, should value and assess the other. The main track, in connection with such side tracks, make up the one system and property. To destroy one, will greatly cripple and reduce the value of the other. The side tracks, and the land upon which they are located, will have a value, measured by the value of the land as land, and the value of the side tracks and improvements thereon, and these all together will add to the value of the whole line in proportion as they afford facilities for the transaction of business over that line. The State board of equalization could not well fix a just valuation upon the railroad without a knowledge of such facilities. And hence the statute requires the railroad company to furnish, annually, a sworn statement to the county auditors of the several counties through which the road may run, of the amount of the main, and all second tracks, side tracks, and turnouts, in the county. The amount of each thus reported to the auditors, they are required to report to the auditor of state. Section 6407.
The statute also requires that the railroad company shall report to the auditor of state the length of the main track, side or second tracks, turnouts, and the number and quality of buildings or other structures on "railroad track,"...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pfaff v. Terre Haute & I.R. Co.
......railroad track” applies only to the original right of way or strip of ground on which the main track is laid, together with the personal property thereon, ... Appellee owns, and for a number of years has owned, some small tracts of land, and some lots and parts of lots in the city of Indianapolis, aggregating about 12 acres. The purposes for, and the manner in which, those lots are and have been used, are stated in its complaint as follows: ......