Kansas City & Southwestern Railroad v. Baird

41 Kan. 69
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJanuary 15, 1889
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 41 Kan. 69 (Kansas City & Southwestern Railroad v. Baird) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kansas City & Southwestern Railroad v. Baird, 41 Kan. 69 (kan 1889).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This was an appeal from an award made by the board of county commissioners of Cowley county for damages alleged to have been sustained by Volney Baird by reason of the appropriation of a right-of-way over his land by the Kansas City & Southwestern Railroad Company. A verdict was rendered for Baird for eleven hundred and fifty dollars, and judgment entered thereon. The Railroad Company excepted, and brings the case here.

The principal question presented and argued is as to the competency of the evidence of the value of the land by witnesses, who were farmers residing within the vicinity of the land, but had no knowledge of the sales of land in their vicinity. This question was fully examined, and decided adversely to the railroad company, in K. C. & S. W. Rld. Co. v. Ehret, ante, p. 22; 20 Pac. Rep. 538.

[70]*70It is also urged that the trial court erred in permitting the jury to take into consideration the probable expenses of constructing and maintaining reasonable farm-crossings. It is said that there was no evidence that additional crossings were needed. It appears from the record that, with the consent of the parties and the permission of the court, the jury were conducted .in a body to view the land; they therefore had full opportunity to examine and ascertain what crossings the railroad had built, and what were needed. (Lewis on Em. Dorn., §496.)

It is further urged that Baird was allowed sixteen dollars for fences taken on the right-of-way, and also $203.40 for the right-of-way actually taken; that the damages allowed for the right-of-way included the fences thereon. The evidence, however, shows that some of the witnesses testified that all of the land was worth upon an average $45 per acre, and also, that the hedge or fence taken was worth from $16 to $20. We therefore cannot say that there was any error in the item of $16 for the fence or hedge taken.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

Related

Hodges v. State Highway Commission
422 P.2d 570 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1967)
Eisenring v. Kansas Turnpike Authority
332 P.2d 539 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1958)
Burger v. City of Wichita
294 P. 670 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1931)
Yeager v. State
1929 OK CR 250 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1929)
Wichita Falls N.W. Ry. Co. v. Harvey Et Ux.
1914 OK 597 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Moorhead v. Arnold
84 P. 742 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1906)
Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Farwell
83 N.W. 71 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1900)
Wellington Waterworks v. Brown
50 P. 966 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1897)
City of Topeka v. Martineau
42 Kan. 387 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 Kan. 69, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kansas-city-southwestern-railroad-v-baird-kan-1889.