Tex. & St. Louis R. R. Co. v. Matthews

Decision Date26 October 1883
Docket NumberCase No. 1529.
PartiesTEXAS & ST. LOUIS R. R. CO. v. H. S. MATTHEWS.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from Bowie. Tried below before the Hon. B. T. Estes.

H. S. Matthews instituted this suit on the 10th of February, 1881, against the appellant, to recover damages for the construction of the railway across the H. S. Janes survey of land, situated in Bowie county. First, for the value of the land taken; second, for the value of the timber cut down.

Trial and verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of $500. Upon this a remittitur of $35 was entered by plaintiff, upon the suggestion of the court that the verdict was at least excessive to that extent, whereby the amount was reduced to $465, for which judgment was finally entered.

M. H. Whitaker and Chas. T. Bonner, for appellant.

Dan T. Leary, for appellee.

WILLIE, CHIEF JUSTICE.

The only question for our decision in this case is: What is the measure of damages in an action brought by the owner of land against a railroad company for taking possession of a portion of his land without his consent and constructing a railroad through it?

Our statute, in cases where land is condemned under it, provides that the commissioners shall estimate the injuries sustained and the benefits received by the owner as to the remaining portion of the real estate, and the extent of such increase or diminution, and shall assess the damages accordingly. R. S., art. 4195. This is legislative construction as to what amounts to a compensation to the owner for landed property taken for public use. Is he entitled to any more in case the land is appropriated without a resort to the methods provided by statute? In the latter case the railroad company becomes a trespasser, whereas in the former it proceeds to subject the land to its use in the proper forms of the law. As in case of trespass the injured party recovers compensation for his losses, damages for any special injuries or expenses to which he is subjected, and in a proper case vindictive damages, it would seem proper that where there were no special damages nor a case made for those of a punitory character, the amount to be recovered would be what would compensate the owner for the loss he had sustained in having his property taken from him and appropriated to railroad purposes. The compensation as fixed by the statute referred to should, by analogy, be applied to such a case, and the plaintiff should recover the amount of the value of the land...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Boise Valley Const. Co. v. Kroeger
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • December 11, 1909
    ...... Pa. 404; Tompkins v. R. Co., 21 S.C. 420; Rio. Grande etc. Ry. Co. v. Oritz, 75 Tex. 602, 12 S.W. 1129;. International etc. Ry. Co. v. Juina & Benitos, 59. Tex. 326; Midland Ry. ...Co., 52 Iowa 411, 3 N.W. 462;. Daniels v. R. Co., 41 Iowa 52; Texas etc. R. Co. v. Matthews, 60 Tex. 215; Houston etc. R. Co. v. Adams,. 63 Tex. 200.). . . "If. land is taken ......
  • Glover v. State Highway Commission of Kansas
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • March 5, 1938
    ...... 284 S.W. 98; Foote v. Lorain & C. Ry. Co. et al., 21. Ohio Cir.Ct.R. 319; Blair v. Waldo, Tex. Civ.App., . 245 S.W. 986; Texas & St. Louis R. R. Co. v. Matthews, 60 Tex. 215; Peoria, B. & ......
  • White v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • July 9, 1969
    ...writ ref'd n.r.e.); Taylor v. City of Austin, 291 S.W.2d 399 (Tex.Civ.App.1956, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Texas & St. Louis Railway Company v. Matthews, 60 Tex. 215 (1883). The landowner is entitled to compensation in money at the time of taking for the difference in market value of the easement ......
  • St. Louis Belt and Terminal Railway Company v. Cartan Real Estate Company
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 11, 1907
    ...Eminent Domain (2 Ed.), sec. 486; 10 Am. and Eng. Ency of Law (2 Ed.), 1158; Matter of Water Comm., 3 Edwards Ch. (N. Y.) 552; Railroad v. Mathews, 60 Tex. 215; Doud Railroad, 76 Iowa 438; Searle v. Railroad, 33 Pa. St. 57; Manning v. Lowell, 173 Mass. 100; Railroad v. Galgiani, 49 Cal. 137......
  • 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