Home/Michigan Supreme Court/Potter v. Indiana & Lake Michigan Railway Co.

Potter v. Indiana & Lake Michigan Railway Co.

54 N.W. 956, 95 Mich. 389, 1893 Mich. LEXIS 649
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedApril 21, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 54 N.W. 956 (Potter v. Indiana & Lake Michigan Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Potter v. Indiana & Lake Michigan Railway Co., 54 N.W. 956, 95 Mich. 389, 1893 Mich. LEXIS 649 (Mich. 1893).

Opinion

Grant, J.

Plaintiff is the owner of an undivided half interest in five University lots, numbered 14, 16, 17, 24, and 25, located in a marsh on the left bank of the St. Joseph river, near its mouth. Each lot contains five acres. The lots are situated on section 24, township 4 S., range 19 W., and, with 25 similar lots, comprise the S. W. of said section. This land was granted by the United States to the State of Michigan for University purposes, and in 1842 was divided and platted into lots for sale. Plaintiff [391]*391became tbe purchaser in 1881. The defendant’s road was-constructed in 1888. In October, 1890, the defendant and the township of St. Joseph made a contract for the construction of a viaduct,' which is the subject of this controversy, and which was constructed according to the contract, and accepted by the municipality. The village of' St. Joseph is situated on the high ground on the left bank of the river, directly opposite the viaduct. The village of Benton Harbor is situated on the high ground on the-right bank of the river. These two villages, in 1890, had a population of over 7,000. Across the river is a bridge with a swing. The viaduct and the bridge across the river are a part of the only public highway between the two villages. The viaduct is required by public convenience and necessity. It is over a bayou which was originally connected with the river upon the north, and is now extended to the river upon the south. The old bayou was crooked, and extended across plaintiff’s lots 14 and 16. In 1881 a canal was dredged,, by private subscription, to the westward of the old bayou, from a point on lot 2 southward to the river. The old bayou is connected with this, canal near the northerly side of lot 2. The situation will appear upon the plat on page 392.

The viaduct is situated upon lot 1, 100 rods distant fromt plaintiff’s nearest lot. The clear space between the water and the viaduct is 24£ feet, and its width 40 feet. In 1842 a bridge .was constructed across the St. 'Joseph river for a territorial road, and one across this same bayou for the same road, on lot 1/ This bridge was lower than the present viaduct, had no draw or swing, and existed for more than 30 years. In the original surveys by the United States government, this bayou was unmeandered. In 1881, when the canal was dug, the old bridge was removed, and a swing put in its place, about eight feet above the water. At this time the old bayou, to whatever extent it may

[392]*392

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

Related

Bowman v. McGoldrick Lumber Co.
219 P. 1063 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1923)
Forbes Pioneer Boat Line v. Board of Commissioners
77 Fla. 742 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1919)
Lepire v. Klenk
134 N.W. 1119 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1912)
Swain v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
160 Ill. App. 533 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 N.W. 956, 95 Mich. 389, 1893 Mich. LEXIS 649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/potter-v-indiana-lake-michigan-railway-co-mich-1893.