Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Union Lime Co.

140 N.W. 346, 152 Wis. 633, 1913 Wisc. LEXIS 123
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 11, 1913
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 140 N.W. 346 (Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Union Lime Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Union Lime Co., 140 N.W. 346, 152 Wis. 633, 1913 Wisc. LEXIS 123 (Wis. 1913).

Opinion

SiebecKer, J.

The Nast Brothers Lime & Stone Company and the Union Lime Company are engaged in operating stone quarries and lime works in section 6, township 14 north, range 18 east, in Eond du Lac county. The Chicago [634]*634& Northwestern Railway Company is tbe owner of and is operating a spur track, with branches, switches, and sidings from its main line, through section 5 of the town ánd range mentioned above. This spur track terminates where it serves the business and interests of the Union Lime Company. A map of the location of the properties of the parties and the existing railroad tracks is made a part of the record and appears on the opposite page.

The Eden Independent Lime & Stone Company is the owner of premises, quarries, plants, buildings, lime kilns, etc., in section 6. Some time prior to June 30, 1911, the Eden Independent Lime & Stone Company petitioned the railroad commission of Wisconsin that the railway company be ordered and required to construct a spur track to its premises from the terminus of the spur track on the premises of the Union Lime Company. The commission made the following order upon the petition:

“It is therefore ordered, that the Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company construct a suitable sidetrack as prayed for by the petitioner herein, along the route designated by the blue print attached to the original petition, which sidetrack shall be an extension of the railway company’s track marked ‘D’ on said blue print.
“It is further ordered, that the petitioner herein deposit with the Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company the sum of one thousand six hundred and sixty dollars ($1,660), the estimated cost of the proposed extension, and in addition thereto the sum of two hundred dollars ($200) to cover the portion of the right of way which has to be acquired by condemnation or otherwise; and also give the railroad company a bond, to be approved by the commission as to form, amount, and surety, securing the railroad against loss on account of any expense incurred beyond the amount of the deposit with the railroad.
“Sixty days is deemed a reasonable period of time within which to comply with the provisions of this order. If for any valid reason compliance with the order cannot be made within such time, the commission will extend the same upon application.”

[635]*635

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Railroad Commission v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad
96 S.E. 855 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1918)
Menasha Woodenware Co. v. Railroad Commission
166 N.W. 435 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1918)
People ex rel. Long Island Railroad v. Public Service Commission
170 A.D. 429 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 N.W. 346, 152 Wis. 633, 1913 Wisc. LEXIS 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-northwestern-railway-co-v-union-lime-co-wis-1913.