St. Joseph, St. L. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Smith

Decision Date26 November 1902
Citation70 S.W. 700,170 Mo. 327
CourtMissouri Supreme Court
PartiesST. JOSEPH, ST. L. & S. F. RY. CO. v. SMITH et al.

Appeal from circuit court, Clinton county; W. S. Herndon, Judge.

Action by St. Joseph, St. Louis & Santa Fé Railway Company against Daniel Smith and others. From a judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Lathrop, Morrow, Fox & Moore, for appellant. E. C. Hall, for respondents.

MARSHALL, J.

This is an action in ejectment for a certain parcel of land in the town of Gower, in Clinton county, Mo., described in the petition as follows: "Beginning 30 feet north of the northwest corner of lot 12, in block 14, in the town of Gower, in said county and state; thence north 71 feet to an old fence; thence eastwardly along said fence 185 feet to stock yards fence; thence south 91 feet to a point 30 feet north of block 14 in said town of Gower; thence west 178 feet to place of beginning." The suit was begun on April 2, 1898. The petition is in the usual form, and the answer is a general denial. The circuit court directed a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. Pending the appeal the defendant died, and the cause has been properly revived in this court against his heirs, John R. Smith, Elias T. Smith, Sarah E. Quinn, wife of G. W. Quinn, Byrda Sodownsky, wife of John Sodownsky, Wm. D. Smith, Alfred Smith, Aden Smith, Henry C. Smith, and David W. Smith.

1. Daniel Smith, the original defendant, is the common source of title. The plaintiff claims title by mesne conveyances from said Daniel Smith, and the defendant shows no record title, but claims title by limitation. The defendant challenges the plaintiff's record title, and claims that it has no title whatever, and the plaintiff denies that the defendant has or could have any title by limitation, inasmuch as the property has been and is appropriated to a public use, to wit, use by a railroad company, and therefore is exempt from the operation of the statute of limitations by the express provisions of section 4270, Rev. St. 1899. The defendant has been in the actual possession of the premises for a sufficient length of time to claim title by limitation, and is entitled to retain such possession unless no title by limitation could be acquired to the premises while so appropriated to such public use. The plaintiff's title arises in this wise: On the 2d of November, 1868, the St. Louis & St. Joseph Railroad Company executed a mortgage to the Farmers' Loan & Trust Company of New York, which covered all its property, right of way, rights, privileges, and franchises, and, further, expressly making the following provision: "And including its railroad, made or to be made, its track, laid or to be laid, its stations or station houses, depot grounds, rails, fences, bridges, and all other belongings or structures, as well as engine houses or machine shops, rolling stock, and other property pertaining to said railroad now owned, or possessed, or acquired, or hereafter to be owned, possessed, or acquired, and all lands or real estate to which the said party of the first part may become entitled through or by reason of the construction of the said railroad, together with all and singular the rights and privileges and corporate property and franchises of said railroad company, and all the appurtenances to the above-described premises belonging or in any wise appertaining." Thereafter, on the 18th of March, 1874, this mortgage was foreclosed, and S. Angier Chase became the purchaser at the trustee's sale, and on the 15th of June, 1874, he conveyed the property to a new corporation, called the St. Joseph & St. Louis Railroad Company, and thereafter, on the 1st of January, 1888, that company conveyed the property to the plaintiff company. At the date of the mortgage by the St. Louis & St. Joseph Railroad Company to the Farmers' Loan & Trust...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • Eureka Real Estate & Inv. Co. v. Southern Real Estate & Financial Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 10 Marzo 1947
    ... ... Co. v. King, 50 S.W.2d 94; ... City of Laddonia v. Day, 178 S.W. 741; Frisco ... Ry. Co. v. Dillard, 43 S.W.2d 1034; St. Joe Ry. Co ... v. Smith, 70 S.W. 700, 170 Mo. 327; Hannibal & St ... Joe Ry. Co. v. Tatman, 51 S.W. 412; Bowzer v. State ... Highway Comm. 170 S.W.2d 399. (5) A permissive ... ...
  • Brown v. Weare
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 18 Abril 1941
    ... 152 S.W.2d 649 348 Mo. 135 Joseph" A. Brown, Plaintiff, v. Porter B. Weare et al., Defendants, W. G. White, Appellant No. 37273 Supreme Court of Missouri April 18, 1941 ...   \xC2" ... Louis-S ... F. Ry. Co. v. King, 329 Mo. 1203, 50 S.W.2d 94; ... Chouteau v. St. Louis, 331 Mo. 1206, 56 S.W.2d 1050; ... Wooldridge v. Smith, 243 Mo. 190, 147 S.W. 1019, 40 ... L. R. A. (N. S.) 762; State v. Griffith, 342 Mo ... 229, 114 S.W.2d 976; Askew v. Vicksburg S. & P. Ry ... ...
  • Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co. v. Freer
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 9 Diciembre 1958
    ...S.E.2d 700, 703, 704, and cases cited; Bond v. Texas & P. Ry. Co., 181 La. 763, 160 So. 406, 408-409.9 St. Joseph, St. Louis & Santa Fe R. Co. v. Smith, 170 Mo. 327, 70 S.W. 700, 702.10 Gilliland v. Chicago & Alton Ry. Co., 19 Mo.App. 411, 416; Gurney v. Minneapolis Union Elevator, 63 Minn.......
  • State ex rel. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Shain
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 13 Diciembre 1939
    ...was granted. We find no support in the Coates & Hopkins Realty Company case for the alleged conflict. St. Joseph, St. Louis & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Smith et al., supra, was in ejectment. It was ruled (170 Mo. l. c. 333, 70 702), that a railroad company "is not cut off from its right to claim ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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