Southern Ry. Co. v. Carroll

• Decision Date: 24 February 1910
• Citation: 67 S.E. 4,86 S.C. 56
• Parties: SOUTHERN RY. CO. et al. v. CARROLL et al.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

67 S.E. 4

86 S.C. 56

SOUTHERN RY. CO. et al. v. CARROLL et al.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

February 24, 1910

On Rehearing, May 11, 1910.

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Barnwell County; James Aldrich, Judge.

Action by the Southern Railway Company and another against Julia R Carroll and others to restrain an action at law. From a judgment denying the injunction, and submitting issues in the action at law, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Harley & Best and B. T. Rice, for appellants. Bates & Simms, for respondents.

WOODS J.

On the 27th day of August, 1887, William S. Reynolds, in consideration of $450, conveyed a right of way to the Blackville, Alston & Newberry Railroad Company. On the 11th day of May, 1891, the Blackville, Alston & Newberry Railroad Company was consolidated with the Barnwell Railway Company under the name of the Carolina Midland Railway Company, and on the 23d day of June, 1902, the Carolina Midland Railway Company was consolidated with other railroads under the name of the Southern Railway, Carolina Division. On the 30th day of June, 1902, all the franchises and property of the Southern Railway Company, Carolina Division, were leased to the Southern Railway Company for the term of 999 years. Thus the Southern Railway, Carolina Division, and the Southern Railway Company succeeded to whatever rights the Blackville Alston & Newberry Railroad Company acquired under the deed made by William S. Reynolds. Reynolds had been in possession of the tract of land which embraced the right of way for more than 20 years before the date of the deed made by him, and he remained in possession until his death in November, 1888. Thereafter, on the 25th day of February 1889, a deed was recorded in Barnwell county from Darling Peebles, dated the 5th day of March, 1848, purporting to convey the lands of which Reynolds had been in possession including that covered by the right of way, which he had undertaken to convey to the railroad company, to Julia Reynolds, the daughter of Darling Peebles, and her husband, William S. Reynolds, "for and during the term of their natural lives, and to the survivor of them, and from and after their deaths, to their three children Julia Reynolds, Laura V. Reynolds, and Anna Reynolds, and their heirs forever." In 1889, after the death of Julia Reynolds, and Wm. S. Reynolds, the land was divided among their three daughters mentioned in the deed, and Julia Reynolds, who afterwards became by marriage Mrs. Julia Carroll, acquired by deed all the interest of her two sisters in the portion of the tract over which the railroad company is operating its trains under the claim of a right of way acquired from William S. Reynolds. On the 15th day of September, 1904, Mrs. Carroll presented her petition to Judge James Aldrich, alleging that William S. Reynolds held under the deed from Peebles, and therefore could grant a right of way only to the extent of his life interest, and asking that the clerk of the court of common pleas of Barnwell county be directed to impanel a jury to ascertain the compensation to be paid to her for the use of the right of way. On the 6th of September, 1904, the order asked for was made. The proceedings were against the Southern Railway alone, but on the 19th of October, 1904, the petition and order were amended by making the Southern Railway, Carolina Division, and the Carolina Midland Railway Company parties defendant. The Southern Railway and Southern Railway, Carolina Division, then brought their action to enjoin the proceeding to assess compensation to Mrs. Carroll. Mrs. Carroll died after the action for injunction was commenced, and William Gilmore Simms, clerk of the court of common pleas, who in his official capacity administered on her derelict estate, was made a party defendant.

The main questions made by the complaint for injunction and the answer were: First. If the Blackville, Alston & Newberry Railway Company were still in possession of the right of way, would it be protected as a purchaser for value without notice against the claim of Mrs. Carroll, by reason of the fact that it received a conveyance from Reynolds in 1887; the deed of 1848, under which Mrs. Carroll claims, not having been recorded until 1889? Second. If the first question be answered in the affirmative, would the Southern Railway, Carolina Division, and its lessee, the Southern Railway Company, be protected as the grantees or successors of the rights of the Blackville, Alston & Newberry Railroad Company, although the right and title of that Railroad Company was not acquired until 1902, after the deed under which Mrs. Carroll claims was recorded? After the introduction of the various records, and of evidence as to the location and value of the land, the circuit judge dismissed the complaint for injunction, and submitted to the jury only the question of the amount of damages. Thereupon the jury returned a verdict of $1,510 in favor of the plaintiff. The two questions above stated are made by the exceptions; and, as there is no conflict in the evidence, they are really issues of law.

At the time that William S. Reynolds conveyed to the Blackville Alston & Newberry Railway Company, he had been in the apparent adverse possession of the land for more than 20...