Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. Town of Fairfax

61 S.E. 950, 80 S.C. 414, 1908 S.C. LEXIS 187
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedJuly 6, 1908
Docket6935
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 61 S.E. 950 (Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. Town of Fairfax) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. Town of Fairfax, 61 S.E. 950, 80 S.C. 414, 1908 S.C. LEXIS 187 (S.C. 1908).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Pope.

This is an action by the plaintiff, wherein an injunction is sought to prevent interference by the town of Fairfax, of Barnwell county, and State of South Carolina, of what is known as Sumter avenue of said town so far as the sixty feet in said avenue is set up, of the grant of land on the 210 feet in width and 2,100 feet in depth, from W. J. and J. F. Sanders unto the Savannah Construction Company for the South Bound Railroad, said grant being set up in the agreement entered into by said W. J. and J. F. Sanders on the 30th day of December, 1890, and recorded in the office of R. M. C. for Barnwell county in Book 6B, page 346.

The plaintiff, the Seaboard Air Dine Railway Company, obtained a preliminary injunction from his Honor, Ernest Gary, on the 25th day of June, 1906, and a rule by which the defendants were required to show cause on the 6th day of *417 July, 1906, why the injunction should not be made permanent.

Cause was shown by said defendants; a hearing took place before his Honor, Judge R. W. Memminger, upon maps and deeds and testimony by both parties, and on the 21st day of December, 1907, Judge Memminger filed his decree, in which he held that the plaintiff’s rights were fully protected and that the defendants must yield their possession of the said sixty feet of said Sumter avenue over to the plaintiff, ceasing all manner of interference with the plaintiff’s possession of said sixty feet of land and returning the twenty dollars in money exacted of their agent.

From this decree of his Honor, Judge Memminger, the defendants have appealed to this Court upon six grounds. It becomes necessary, therefore, that we should examine these grounds in their order.

1. “Because his Honor erred, in holding that the plat relied upon by the defendants was not made by the plaintiff railway company; whereas, his Honor should have held, that the plat relied upon by the defendants-appellants was made by the Savannah Construction Company and by the grantors of the plaintiff-respondent, and with their full knowledge and acquaintance of the said plat; the same being of record, and being a part and parcel of respondent’s deed; and should have held that the respondent fully concurred in the adverse use of the streets laid out on said plat.”

It is proper that we should reproduce, at this juncture, the complaint referred to, which is as follows:

“The complaint of the above named plaintiff respectfully shows unto the Court:
1. “That it is a corporation duly created and organized under the laws of the States of Virginia and North Carolina, under the corporate name and style of Seaboard Air Dine Railway Company, and operates a line of railway through the State of South Carolina and the County of Barnwell on its line of road towards Savannah, in the State of Georgia, in doing which it passes through the town of Fairfax, in said *418 county, and by its charter is authorized to hold and enjoy property, contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued as a natural person would be under the law.
2. “That the town of Fairfax is a municipal incorporation existing under the laws of the State, with all the rights, powers and privileges granted by and subject to all the limitations and provisions contained in an Act entitled an Act to provide for and regulate the incorporation of towns of less than one thousand inhabitants in this State, approved 23 d December, A. D. 1886.
3. “That the South Bound Railroad Company is a corporation duly created and organized under the laws of the States of South Carolina and Georgia, and was the owner of a railroad constructed and operated between Camden, in the State of South Carolina, which is its northern terminus, and extending in a southerly direction to the city of Savannah, in the State of Georgia, in doing which it passed through the city of Columbia and the towns of Cayce, Denmark and Fair-fax, in South Carolina.
4. “The Savannah Construction Company is a corporation duly created and organized under the State of Georgia, and by its charter is authorized’ to hold and enjoy property, real and personal, sue and be sued, contract and be contracted with as are natural persons.
5. “That on the 30th day of December, A. D. 1890, W. J. and J. F. Sanders, citizens of the County of Barnwell and landowners in the vicinity of Fairfax, then known by the name of Campbellton, entered into a contract of sale with the said Savannah Construction Company and by their mutual agreement, under their hands and seals, covenanted to sell and convey and did convey to the said Savannah Construction Company a tract of land two hundred and twelve acres in and about said town of Fairfax, therein called Campbellton in said deed, particularly described upon the terms and conditions therein set forth, and among other things, it is particularly provided that ‘said tract of land shall be hereafter laid out by the said Savannah Construction Company, *419 or its engineer, into a town, with streets, lanes, lots and blocks for building purposes in such shapes, sizes and dimensions as the said Savannah Construction Company, or its engineer, may think best suited for a town or city, and with parks and squares, if said company shall think best; a right of way one hundred feet wide through said tract of land for said South Bound Railroad Company, and also a tract of land twenty-one hundred (3,100) feet in length and two hundred and ten (310) feet in width, beginning at the crossing of the Port Royal and Augusta Railroad by the South Bound Railroad and running parallel to and on the west side of the South Bound Railroad, for the use of the said South Bound Railroad Company, to be first reserved; and after said tract of land is so laid off as a town into blocks and lots with streets and lanes and such parks and squares if any, as may be thought best, said right of way one hundred feet wide and said strip and tract of land two hundred and ten (310) feet wide by twenty-one hundred (3,100) feet long being first reserved' for the uses and purposes of said South Bound Railroad Company, every alternate lot or block shall be and become the property in fee simple of the said Savannah Construction Company, and the remaining alternate lots or blocks shall be and become the property in fee simple of the said W. J. and J. F. Sanders; and after said allotment, which is to be done in such way as to be fair and equitable to both parties, the said Savannah Construction Company and the said Sanders shall sign such an instrument or deed as will clearly show the lots and blocks belonging to said Savannah Construction Company and those belonging to the said W. J. and J. F. Sanders.’
“All of which will more particularly and at large appear by reference to said agreement, a copy of which is hereto attached as a part of this complaint, and is recorded in Book 6B, p. 346, office of the clerk of the court for said county.
6. “That in pursuance of and compliance with the hereinbefore mentioned contract of sale, on the 14th day of November, A. D. 1891, the said William J. Sanders and *420 Elliott R.

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

Related

Stone v. International Paper Co.
359 S.E.2d 83 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1987)
State v. Beach Co.
248 S.E.2d 115 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1978)
Anderson v. Town of Hemingway
237 S.E.2d 489 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1977)
City of Scottsdale v. Mocho
444 P.2d 437 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1968)
Tyler v. Guerry
160 S.E.2d 889 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1968)
Shia v. Pendergrass
72 S.E.2d 699 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1952)
Town of Estill v. Clarke
184 S.E. 89 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 S.E. 950, 80 S.C. 414, 1908 S.C. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seaboard-air-line-railway-co-v-town-of-fairfax-sc-1908.