Savannah v. Williams

• Decision Date: 24 December 1909
• Citation: 133 Ga. 679,66 S.E. 942
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court
• Parties: SAVANNAH, A. & N. RY. CO. v. WILLIAMS et al.

133 Ga. 679

66 S.E. 942

SAVANNAH, A. & N. RY. CO.

v.WILLIAMS et al.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Dec. 24, 1909.

1. Eminent Domain (55 104. 136^*)—Mearutit; of Damages—Railroad Right of Way.

In a proceeding by a railroad company to condemn land, the landowner is not only entitled to have compensation for the value of the land proposed to be taken, but also he is entitled to damages for any depreciation in the value of the balance of his land, caused by the construction and operation of the railroad through it; and, in estimating such damages, evidence relating to the effect on its market value of smoke, cinders, and noise, resulting from operating a railroad through the land, is competent.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Eminent Domain. Cent. Dig. §§ 278-281, 363-306; Dec. Dig. §§ 104, 136.*]

2. New Trial (§ 41*)—Harmless Error—Inaccuracies in Charge.

Verbal inaccuracies in a charge, not calculated to mislead or obscure the meaning of the court, will not require a new trial.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see New Trial, Dec. Dig. § 41.*]

3. Eminent Domain (§ 262*) — Appeal — Amount of Damages.

Where, on the question of the value of the land taken and the consequential damages to the remainder of the lot, the amount of the verdict is within the range of the estimates of the different witnesses; and the amount is approved by the trial judge, this court will not interfere on the ground that the verdict is excessive.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Eminent Domain, Cent. Dig. § 685; Dec. Dig. § 262.*]

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from Superior Court, Bullock County; B. T. Rawlings, Judge.

Action by the Savannah, Augusta & Northern Railway Company against W. B. Williams and others to condemn land. From an order overruling a motion for new trial on appeal from the award, the railroad company brings error. Affirmed.

Brannen & Booth and Fred T. Lanier, for plaintiff in error.

Johnston & Cone, A. M. Deal, and H. B. Strange, for defendants in error.

EVANS, P. J. 1. The writ of error is to the overruling of a motion for new trial. The case was an appeal from the assessors' award in a proceeding by a railroad company to condemn a right of way. Substantially all of the grounds of the motion, whether complaining of the admission of evidence, refusal to charge, or exceptions to the charge, present a single proposition. The trial court held that in a condemnation proceeding the landowner was entitled to recover as consequential damages any depreciated value of the remainder of his land, and that the jury might consider evidence as to smoke, noise, dust, cinders, and the like, not as Independent elements of damage, but in determining the value of the property after the railroad has been constructed and in operation. It is urged bycounsel for plaintiff in error that evidence as to noise, smoke, and the like incidents in the operation of a railroad are too remote and speculative, and that noise and smoke give no cause of action. The principal case cited by them is the case of Austin v. Augusta Terminal Co., 108 Ga. 671, 682, 34 S. E. 852, 856, 47 L. R. A. 755. In that case the property affected by the operation of the railway did not abut on the street along which the railroad was constructed, and there was no physical invasion of it by the railroad company; and it was held that a railroad company is not liable to an owner of property for diminution in the market value, resulting from the making of noise, or from the sending forth of cinders and smoke in the prosecution of the company's lawful business, which did not physically affect or injure the property...