Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Railroad Commission of Indiana

• Decision Date: 20 November 1908
• Docket Number: 21,237
• Citation: 86 N.E. 328,171 Ind. 189
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court
• Parties: Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana

86 N.E. 328

171 Ind. 189

Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana

No. 21,237

Supreme Court of Indiana

November 20, 1908

From Superior Court of Marion County(74,686); Vinson Carter Judge.

Suit by the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company against the Railroad Commission of Indiana.From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Samuel O. Pickens and Owen Pickens, for appellant.

Charles E. Shiveley and Ray K. Shiveley, for appellee.

OPINION

Gillett, C. J.

Appellant instituted this suit to enjoin the Railroad Commission of Indiana from enforcing, or attempting to enforce, an order requiring appellant to put in a certain interchange track connecting it with a track of the Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company, and requiring said companies to interchange business with each other in car-load lots.So far as material for present purposes, it may be said that the first paragraph of the complaint, after showing that appellant, a consolidated railway corporation, organized and incorporated under the laws of the states of Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, owns and operates lines of railroad in all of said states, among others a line extending from Pittsburg, in the state of Pennsylvania, through the city of Richmond in this State, to the city of Indianapolis, and is a common carrier of freight, on said line of railroad, in and among said states, alleges that, in a certain proceeding then pending before it, said commission, after a hearing, made a final order in certain words and figures.This order, omitting its title, is as follows: "This case having been heard and considered, and the commission being fully advised in the premises, it is ordered that the respondents herein shall, on and after December 1, 1907, interchange business with each other in car-load lots at the intersection of their railroads in the city of Richmond, Indiana.It is further ordered that the respondentPittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company shall, within sixty days from the date of this order, construct and put in a track to be used for said interchange of cars between said respondents' lines, and shall join said track to and connect it with the respondent Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company's exchange track, now constructed, said track to connect at said point of junction about ten feet west of the west line of Fourth street and about eighty feet north of the north line of North street, and leading out of the Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company's main track with a curvature of sixteen degrees to the right, and up an ascending grade of two and five-tenths per cent, and to have a capacity of not less than eight cars.Said track is shown and designated by letters and figures as follows: 'Capacity, eight cars; 16 degrees curve, grade two and five-tenths per cent.'And in red lines, on Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company's print dated June 15, 1906, showing respondent's addition to Richmond freight yard, and said print is attached to, and so far as applicable is made a part of, this order.It is further ordered that jurisdiction is retained in this proceeding to determine, if necessary, between said respondents, if they cannot agree, any question of expense, trackage, interchange or other matters pertinent to this proceeding and within the jurisdiction of this commission.And it is further ordered that jurisdiction is retained for the purpose of enforcing, if necessary, compliance with the law and this order by appropriate actions for penalties and mandates."

After setting out said order, the paragraph alleges the following additional facts: "Plaintiff further avers that said interchange track will be about 500 feet in length, 400 feet of which will be upon the land of the plaintiff, and that the land upon which said order requires the interchange track to be located and constructed is a part of a larger tract of land bounded on the north by plaintiff's main and sidetracks, on the south by North D street, on the east by Sixth street, and on the west by Fourth avenue, the Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad and the Whitewater river; that the plaintiff is, and for more than a year past has been, in possession of all of said land and the owner in fee simple thereof; that said tract of land was purchased by the plaintiff for a large sum of money, to be used in the operation of its freight yard and terminals for the handling of its traffic at the city of Richmond; that all of said land is necessary to enable the plaintiff to handle its said traffic at the city of Richmond, and to discharge its duties as a common carrier; that, before the commencement of said proceeding before said commission, plaintiff had, by the expenditure of a large sum of money, located, and was operating upon said tract of land, a large number of tracks, platforms, sheds, buildings and other structures constituting its terminal facilities necessary to the proper handling of said traffic, and, prior to the commencement of said proceeding before said commission, plaintiff had laid out and planned the construction of additional tracks upon said land; all of which additional tracks are, or in the near future will be, needed by the plaintiff for terminal facilities for the handling of plaintiff's traffic at that point; that the track required to be constructed by said order of the commission, if constructed, will occupy the land upon which the plaintiff's said additional tracks are laid out and planned to be constructed, and will deprive plaintiff of the use of said additional tracks and the land upon which they would be constructed, and require the plaintiff to surrender to, and for the use of, said Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company the part of plaintiff's land which it has purchased and needs for its terminal facilities to handle its traffic and discharge its duties as a common carrier of commerce over its lines of railroad between said states as aforesaid.Plaintiff further avers that by reason of the advantageous location of plaintiff's railroad tracks, sidings and switches, at said city of Richmond, more than eighty-two per cent of all car-load business in and out of said city is handled by the plaintiff upon its tracks, sidings and switches; that the construction and operation of said interchange track, as prescribed by said order of the commission, will, by reason of the location of plaintiff's main tracks, its sidings and switches of said freight terminal yard, and the congested condition of the traffic upon said tracks and in said yard, greatly interfere with the operations on and about the sidings and switches of said freight terminal yard, and will also interfere with and endanger the movement of passenger- and freight-trains upon the plaintiff's said main tracks adjacent to said yard and its passenger station at the city of Richmond; that the main track of said Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company crosses the plaintiff's railroad under grade almost at right angles, and runs along and upon a narrow strip of land between the western boundary of said tract of land, so acquired by the plaintiff for its terminal freight yard, and the Whitewater river; that, by reason of said location of said crossing of the main track of said Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company and said Whitewater river, which river at that point runs in a deep gorge, it is impossible for the plaintiff or said Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company to acquire, by appropriation or otherwise, any additional land at the junction of said railroads upon which to construct said interchange track; that it is practicable to construct and operate an interchange track between the roads of the plaintiff and said Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company a short distance north of the junction of said railroads, which track, if there located, would be convenient for both of said companies, and for the handling of the business of their patrons, and plaintiff is willing and ready to join said Chicago, Cincinnati & Louisville Railroad Company in the construction and operation of an interchange track at said place; that the construction of said interchange track will cost the plaintiff $ 3,000; that the land on which it is ordered to be constructed is of the value of $ 2,000 to the plaintiff, and that the use of said track would be of no value or benefit to the plaintiff."The paragraph then alleges that the act of the General Assembly approved March 9, 1907(Acts 1907, p. 454, §§ 5531-5538, 5540-5545, 5548-5551, 5553, 5555 Burns 1908) is void so far as said act requires, or authorizes said commission to require, the construction of said track as ordered, because it takes the plaintiff's property without just compensation and without due process of law, and denies to the plaintiff the equal protection of the laws, and because said act is in contravention of section three of the act of congress to regulate commerce, approved February 4, 1887(24 Stat., p. 379, 380,3 U.S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3155), as modified by an act approved June 30, 1906(34 Stat., p. 584, § 1, U.S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1907, p. 892).

The second paragraph of the complaint appears to be substantially the same as the first, except that the second assails the order on the further ground that it will take the property of the plaintiff, which is already appropriated to a public use, and appropriate it to another and different use.

Upon the direction of this court, there has been filed with the record, by appellant's counsel, the map referred to in said order (the map appearing to be a part thereof), and...