Scrutchfield v. Choctaw, O. & W.R. Co.

Decision Date14 February 1907
Citation88 P. 1048,18 Okla. 308,1907 OK 27
PartiesSCRUTCHFIELD v. CHOCTAW, O. & W. R. CO.
CourtOklahoma Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

The location and operation of a railroad upon a public highway may occasion incidental inconvenience and injury to an abutting landowner, but until it cuts off or materially interrupts his means of access to his property, or imposes some additional burthen on his soil, his injury is the same in kind as that suffered by the community in general, and he cannot recover in an action therefor.

[Ed Note.-For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 18, Eminent Domain, §§ 305-311.]

Error from District Court, Logan County; before Justice Jno. H Burford.

Action by C. H. Scrutchfield against the Choctaw, Oklahoma & Western Railroad Company. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

This action was commenced in the district court of Logan county by the filing of the following petition: "Comes now said plaintiff and for his cause of action against said defendant alleges and avers: That defendant is a corporation duly created, organized, and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the territory of Oklahoma, and that such defendant has constructed a railroad within the corporate limits of the city of Guthrie, in said territory. That plaintiff was, long prior to the construction of such railroad as aforesaid, and ever since has been, and still is, the legal owner in fee simple of lots ten (10), eleven (11), thirteen (13), and fourteen (14) in block sixty-five (65), and lot fifteen (15) in block fifty (50), all in that part of said city known as 'East Guthrie.' That at all said times plaintiff had and still has a good dwelling and residence house on said lots ten and eleven and a brick business building on said lot fifteen, and used said lots thirteen and fourteen for a wood market and other purposes. That said residence lots ten and eleven are located on Vilas avenue, in said city, and were at all said times. That such avenue was a lawful avenue and street of said city, and was laid out and worked by said city, and was a thoroughfare on which the public had a right to travel, and the same was much used by the general public for such purpose, that said avenue ran east and west in the front of said residence lots, and that Vine street runs north and south twenty-five feet west of said lots. That defendant has constructed its railroad upon and appropriated one-half of said Vine street, and has constructed its said road upon over, and across said Vilas avenue at a point about 75 feet west from plaintiff's said residence lots, and has completely and permanently obstructed and closed said avenue to any use or travel by the public, and has permanently closed and prevented said avenue from being used as an outlet from said lots. Plaintiff further alleges that said lots thirteen and fourteen are and were located on Springer avenue at the corner of Vine street, aforesaid, and before the construction of said railroad were valuable as a residence site, and also for the business purpose for which the plaintiff was using them as aforesaid. That defendant has constructed its railroad upon and along said Vine street at a point about 40 feet west of said lots, and has appropriated and closed to the public one-half of said street; that said street was a lawful public and much used thoroughfare, the same as said Vilas avenue. Plaintiff further alleges that said lot fifteen is located on Harrison avenue, a short distance west of said railroad; that for a long period of time said avenue, a short distance east of said lot and at the place where said road is now built, was completely cut off and closed to the use of the public; that during all said time plaintiff was engaged in business on said lot, buying and selling new and second-hand goods, and wood, dealing in live stock and other business; that a large part of his business patronage came from points east of the point at which defendant obstructed said avenue, and that, as a consequence of such obstruction, plaintiff's business and profits therefrom were greatly injured and lessened; that said avenue was a lawful and public thoroughfare the same as said Vilas avenue; that it ran east and west past plaintiff's said business lot, and was a good business street with prospects of becoming much better. Wherefore, by reason of all the foregoing actions and doings of said defendant, plaintiff's said real estate has been rendered much less valuable, and plaintiff has been otherwise injured and damaged, all the plaintiff's damage in the sum of four thousand dollars, for which sum with the costs of this action he prays judgment against said defendant." To this petition the defendant filed a general demurrer upon the grounds that the petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The cause coming on to be heard in the court below, upon the demurrer, the same was by the court sustained and the cause dismissed, at the cost of the plaintiff, and from this ruling and judgment of the trial court the cause is brought to this court upon error.

H. M Adams and Devereux & Hildreth, for plaintiff in error.

M. A. Low, C.

O. Blake, and Dale & Bierer, for defendant in error.

GILLETTE J.

From the foregoing statement of facts, it is manifest that the question presented in this case is whether or not the owner of real property can maintain an action for damages thereto by reason of the lawful construction of a railroad where no part of the premises are taken by the railroad right of way, and where the only damage complained of is such as arises by reason of the construction of the railroad across a street which runs in front of the plaintiff's property, and which street is obstructed by the construction of the railroad, at the point where said street is so crossed. From the petition filed in this case, and which is set out in the statement of facts herein, it is apparent that the defendant constructed its line of road so as to occupy the west half of Vine street, which runs north and south in the city of Guthrie. This street is crossed at right angles by Harrison avenue upon which the plaintiff owns a business lot, about 150 feet west of the railroad. It is also crossed at right angles by Vilas avenue, upon which the plaintiff owns a dwelling house property, about 75 feet east of the railroad, and is also crossed at right angles by Springer...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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