Union Depot Co. v. City of St. Louis

• Decision Date: 02 March 1880
• Citation: 8 Mo.App. 412
• Parties: UNION DEPOT COMPANY, Respondent, v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS ET AL., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

8 Mo.App. 412

UNION DEPOT COMPANY, Respondent,

v.CITY OF ST. LOUIS ET AL., Appellants.

St. Louis Court of Appeals, Missouri.

Mar. 2, 1880.

1. The act of March 18, 1871, authorizes the passage by the city of St. Louis of an ordinance consenting to the construction of a union depot upon portions of its streets.

2. Where the property taken for depot purposes was not an ordinary street, notoriously used as such, but was a strip of ground as to which it was reasonably doubtful whether it was a street, the city is estopped to set up want of power to pass the ordinance under which the property was taken for depot purposes, after the depot company, having good cause to believe the ground was not a street, had upon that basis made a great outlay.

APPEAL from the St. Louis Circuit Court.

Affirmed.

LEVERETT BELL, for the appellants.

S. M. BRECKINRIDGE, for the respondent: “Corporations can claim no exception from those rules and maxims which are established to enforce good faith and fair-dealing.”--32 N. H. 299, 6 Cranch, 53; 4 Wall. 495; 20 How. 299. “Acquiescence in and receipt of benefits of a contract or agreement estop a municipal corporation.”--7 Ohio St. 330; 8 Ohio St. 401; Grant v. City of Davenport, 18 Iowa, 191; St. Louis v. Carondelet, 29 Mo. 527; Opinion Supreme Court to Governor, 44 Mo. 21; Railroad Co. v. Marion County, 36 Mo. 303; The State v. Dent, 18 Mo.--; ____ v. Woodson, Governor (per Dillon, J.).

HAYDEN, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a proceeding to restrain the defendant from taking possession of certain ground in the city of St. Louis, which the defendant claims is a public street, and which is designated as Eleventh Street, south of Poplar Street. The defendant, under ordinance 10,749, providing for the removal of obstructions from the streets, sought to remove the buildings which the plaintiff, a corporation under the act of March 18, 1871, in regard to the formation of union depots for railroads in cities, had erected upon the land, the dedication or prior use of which as a public street the plaintiff disputed. The petition alleges that under the act the plaintiff proceeded to acquire real estate for a union depot in St. Louis, within the prescribed limits, and at great expense has constructed a station, with all the appliances, which station is now used by the railroad companies at St. Louis; that the City Council of St. Louis passed ordinance 9081, authorizing the plaintiff to lay down and maintain railroad tracks, and to construct its station in certain streets, which ordinance gives authority to use the ground here in question, if it was a street. This ordinance is set out, and full compliance with the provisions on the plaintiff's part is alleged. It appeared that the plaintiff did proceed according to the ordinance, and that, among other things, the plaintiff paid $20,000, which the city received, towards the building of certain bridges necessary in order to adapt the streets in the vicinity to the construction of the depot, and gave a bond for $200,000, conditioned as directed by the ordinance. Under this ordinance the strip of ground claimed by the city to be a part of Eleventh Street was, as the petition alleges, so far as the public could lay any claim to it as a street at any time, surrendered to the plaintiff for its uses for a union station. The strip was incorporated into and became a part of the depot, it being used as ground for a baggage-room, for which, on account of the great business, it was necessary to have a large space. Some ground immediately contiguous to this strip the plaintiff bought, while other land adjoining it was leased, and the whole was used and occupied under the act of the Legislature, and to carry out the purposes of its creation, by the plaintiff.

The defence was,...