St. Louis & St. Joseph R.R. Co. v. Richardson

Decision Date28 February 1870
Citation45 Mo. 466
PartiesST. LOUIS AND ST. JOSEPH RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. SAMUEL A. RICHARDSON, Respondent.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Fifth District Court.

Hall & Oliver, for appellant, cited 1 Hill. on Rem. for Torts, 297, § 3; 43 Penn. 495; 2 Gray, 107; 11 Cush. 203; 47 Penn. 428; 1 Redf. on Railw. 262-3; 3 Allen, 141.

Richardson, and H. M. & A. H. Vories, for respondent, cited Newby v. Platte County, 25 Mo. 258; Troy & Boston R.R. v. Lee, 13 Barb. 169; same v. Turnpike Co., 16 Barb. 100; 1 Redf. on Railw. 264, note 21; id. 268, and notes; 6 Ohio St. 182; 25 Mo. 544.

WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court

This was a proceeding commenced in the Ray Circuit Court by plaintiff, to condemn, for its own use and for the purpose of constructing its road-bed, a strip of land belonging to the defendant. The petition, in accordance with the provisions of the statute, prayed the court to appoint three disinterested householders--citizens of the county--to view the land and assess the damages which the defendant would sustain in consequence of the appropriation and condemnation of the land for the plaintiff's road-bed. The commissioners were duly appointed, proceeded to the discharge of their duty, and returned their report into court, in which they assessed the defendant's damages at $900. The plaintiff then moved the court to set aside the award of the commissioners and the assessment of damages, and as grounds therefor alleged: first, that the damages assessed were excessive; second, that the commissioners did not take into consideration the advantages and disadvantages which would accrue to the defendant by reason of the construction of the railroad; third, that the land of the defendant would be of greater value after the construction of the road through the same than it was before.

This motion the court overruled and gave judgment on the report, which judgment was affirmed in the District Court. Upon the hearing of the motion the plaintiff introduced several witnesses, who testified that they were well acquainted with the defendant's land, over which the road was located, and that they knew in what manner the road passed through the land; that the land was worth more after the location of the road than it was before the road was located, and would sell for more.

The law under which the proceedings were had declares that after the proper steps are taken, the court shall appoint three disinterested commissioners-- residents of the county in which the real estate, or a part thereof, is situated--to assess the damages which the owners may sustain by reason of the appropriation, who, after having viewed the land, shall forthwith return, under oath, to the clerk of the court, the assessment of damages, setting forth the amount. After the filing of the report, it may be reviewed in the court in which the proceedings were had, on written exceptions filed by either party within ten days after the filing of the report; and the court is thus authorized to make such order as right and justice may require, and may order a new appraisement for good cause shown. (1 Wagn. Stat. 327-8, §§ 3, 4.)

The section empowering the court to review the report or order a new appraisement, is not very...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • State ex Inf. Attorney-General v. Curtis
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 17, 1928
    ...erred in the principal upon which the appraisal was made. St. Louis v. Brown, 155 Mo. 545; St. Louis v. Abeln, 170 Mo. 318; Railroad v. Richardson, 45 Mo. 466; Railroad v. Campbell, 62 Mo. 585. Notice of the taking of property for a public use must precede and not follow the determination o......
  • Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railroad Co. v. Story
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 20, 1888
    ...is conflicting. Railroad v. Almeroth, 62 Mo. 344; Bridge Co. v. Schaubacher, 49 Mo. 555; Road Co. v. Dennis, 67 Mo. 441; Railroad v. Richardson, 45 Mo. 466; Railroad v. Muder, 49 Mo. 166. (a) All are in favor of the action of the trial court. State v. Burns, 85 Mo. 47; Porth v. Gilbert, 85 ......
  • Hickman v. City of Kansas
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • February 5, 1894
    ......491;. Springfield v. Schmook, 68 Mo. 395; Railroad v. Richardson, 45 Mo. 466; Sheehy v. Railroad, 94. Mo. 574-579; Railroad v. Ridge, ... doctrine was vigorously attacked in Thurston v. City of. St. Joseph , 51 Mo. 510, in the opinion by Judge Adams). it was uniformly held that ... done. St. Louis v. Gurno , 12 Mo. 414; Taylor v. St. Louis , 14 Mo. 20; Hoffman v. St. ......
  • Southern Illinois and Missouri Bridge Company v. Stone
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • February 26, 1906
    ...of the road through it, and are not enjoyed by other lands in the same neighborhood. [Newby v. Platte County, 25 Mo. 258; Railroad v. Richardson, 45 Mo. 466; Railroad v. Stock Yards, 120 Mo. 541; v. Knapp, Stout & Co., 160 Mo. 396.] And the benefits peculiar to that portion of the property ......
  • 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