Stark v. Sioux City & Pacific R.

43 Iowa 501
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedJune 13, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 43 Iowa 501 (Stark v. Sioux City & Pacific R.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stark v. Sioux City & Pacific R., 43 Iowa 501 (iowa 1876).

Opinion

Adams, J.

The statute provides that “ any railroad corporation * * may take * * so much real estate as [502]*502may be necessary for the location, construction and convenient use of its railway * * the land so taken otherwise than by consent of the owners shall not exceed one hundred feet in width, except for wood and water stations, unless where greater width is necessary for excavation, embankment, or depositing waste earth.” The amount sought in this case is less than one hundred feet in width, but extends more than fifty feet from the center of the track.

We know of no law which -limits the company to fifty feet on each side of the center of its track. While the company, except for special purposes, cannot condemn more than one hundred feet, it may locate its track wherever it pleases on the land condemned. If, then, the defendant ought to be restricted as the injunction provides, it must be either because more land is not necessary, or because the company owns the lots on the east side of the track. Where a railroad company applies for a hundred feet or any less amount for á right of way, we think it must be conclusively presumed that the amount applied for is necessary.

The company is certainly the best judge as to how much land it needs, and should not be subjected to the embarrassment of proving it in court.

There remains, then, only to be considered, what is the effect of the company’s owning land adjacent to that which it desires to condemn. May it condemn the same width that it might otherwise condemn, and if not, what amount, if any? Suppose the land owned by the company is not suitable for its track; must it first sell its land in order that it may condemn what it needs? We think not. It cannot condemn, it is true, except for “ the location, construction, and convenient use of its railway.”

The railway, then,-must be located on the land condemned. With this restriction the land may extend in either direction within the limitation fixed by statute, that the land taken shall not exceed one hundred feet. If the company owns land on one side, the land condemned may extend in the other direction one hundred feet therefrom.

Reversed.

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

Related

Connolly v. Des Moines & Central Iowa Railway Co.
68 N.W.2d 320 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1955)
Browneller v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America
8 N.W.2d 474 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1943)
Clendaniel v. Conrad
83 A. 1036 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1912)
Long Island Railroad v. Sherwood
147 A.D. 895 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1911)
Brinkley v. Railroad Co.
47 S.E. 791 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)
Postal Tel. Cable Co. of Utah v. Oregon S. L. R.
65 P. 735 (Utah Supreme Court, 1901)
Bennett v. City of Marion
76 N.W. 844 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1898)
Crandall v. Des Moines, Northern & Western Railroad
72 N.W. 778 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1897)
Dougherty v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co.
19 Mo. App. 419 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 Iowa 501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stark-v-sioux-city-pacific-r-iowa-1876.