Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Barker

17 N.E. 797, 125 Ill. 303, 1888 Ill. LEXIS 1097
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJune 16, 1888
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 17 N.E. 797 (Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Barker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Barker, 17 N.E. 797, 125 Ill. 303, 1888 Ill. LEXIS 1097 (Ill. 1888).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scholfield

delivered the opinion of the Court :

The description of the property conveyed to appellee is, “all the line of railroad heretofore belonging to the Springfield and Illinois Southeastern Railway Company, * * * together with the right of way, and all the real and personal property late of the said railway company.” The subsequent words, “in any manner used or appropriated for the operating and maintaining of said line of road,” do not describe an additional kind or title of the property intended to be conveyed, but describe simply the use to which the property intended to be conveyed has heretofore been devoted; and so we must first ascertain whether the property in suit is a part of “the line of railway heretofore belonging to the Springfield and Illinois Southeastern Railway Company,” or whether it is a part of “the right of way late of the said railway company.” The words, “right of way late of said railway company,” plainly can only mean right of way owned by said company, for the property of and the property owned by an individual or corporation, as commonly used and understood, mean precisely the same thing. There is no evidence in this record that the land in suit is a part of the line of railway heretofore belonging to the Springfield and Illinois Southeastern Railway Company, or that it is a part of the right of way owned by that company. The deed is only color of title of that which is shown to be within the description of the grant, and is therefore, under this evidence, not color of title to this land. Stumpf v. Osterhage, 111 Ill. 82; Holbrook v. Forsythe, 112 id. 306.

There being wanting proof of color of title, the judgment below is right, and it must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Philbin v. Carr
129 N.E. 19 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1920)
Lewis v. St. Paul, M. &. M. Ry. Co.
58 N.W. 580 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1894)
Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Barker
25 N.E. 785 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1890)
Republic Life Insurance v. Swigert
12 L.R.A. 328 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1890)
Montgomery v. Wyman
22 N.E. 845 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 N.E. 797, 125 Ill. 303, 1888 Ill. LEXIS 1097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohio-mississippi-railway-co-v-barker-ill-1888.