Carrell v. Muncie, Hartford & Ft. Wayne Railway Co.
Carrell v. Muncie, Hartford & Ft. Wayne Railway Company
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Black, J.
The appellee instituted proceedings for the appropriation of a strip forty feet in width through agricultural lands of the appellant, for the construction of the appellee’s “interurban street railroad,” pursuant to the statute of March 11, 1901 (Acts 1901, p. 461, §5468a et seq. Burns 1901).
Among the instructions asked by the appellant which the court below refused to give to the jury was the following: .“The court instructs the jury that in estimating the damages no deduction shall be made for any benefits that may arise or accrue to the landowner by the location, construction and operation of the road.” Since the trial of this cause, the matter involved in this instruction has been examined by this court and has been decided contrary to the ruling here questioned. See Indianapolis, etc., Traction Co. v. Dunn (1906), 37 Ind. App. 248 ; Indianapolis, etc., Traction Co. v. Ramer (1906), 37 Ind. App. 264 .
We do not find any reason for departing from the conclusion reached on this subject in those cases.
The principles and rules for the assessment of damages in such cases are well ascertained and explained in the decisions; and other questions suggested by counsel may, on another trial, present no difficulty, being approached with the understanding that it is the intention of the legislature that in such cases damages to the landowner should be assessed as in case of the appropriation of land for the use of- a commercial railroad company.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.