State ex rel. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Oshkosh, Algoma & Black Wolf Railroad

77 N.W. 193, 100 Wis. 538, 1898 Wisc. LEXIS 271
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 11, 1898
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 77 N.W. 193 (State ex rel. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Oshkosh, Algoma & Black Wolf Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Oshkosh, Algoma & Black Wolf Railroad, 77 N.W. 193, 100 Wis. 538, 1898 Wisc. LEXIS 271 (Wis. 1898).

Opinion

The motion was granted October 11, 1898, and the following opinion was filed November 22, 1898:

Winslow, J.

The Oshkosh, Algoma & Black Wolf Railroad Company is a corporation organized for the purpose of constructing and operating a railroad for the purpose of carrying persons only from a point within the limits of the city of Oshkosh, through the towns of Algoma and Black Wolf, to the shore of Lake Winnebago. Desiring to cross the tracks and right of way of the relator, it commenced condemnation proceedings for that purpose in the circuit court by petition. The relator appeared upon the bearing, and, among other objections, raised the objection that the respondent was not a railroad corporation, ivithin the meaning of the law authorizing condemnation, and had not the right of eminent domain. The objections were overruled, and an order made by the court appointing commissioners. Thereupon the relator sued out a writ of certiorari from this court, and, after return, the respondent moved to quash the writ.

The motion must be granted. The order in question was a final order made Jry the court in a special proceeding, and hence was appealable. Gill v. M. & L. W. R. Co. 76 Wis. 293; Wis. Cent. R. Co. v. Cornell University, 49 Wis. 162. Appeal from the order is an entirely adequate remedy to test the question raised by the relator. The general rule is well established that a common-law certiorari will not issue where a party has an adequate remedy by appeal. Wordsworth v. Sibley, 38 Wis. 484; McCaffrey v. Nolan, 1 Wis. 361; Harris, Certiorari, § 44.

By the Court. — Writ quashed.

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

Related

South Dakota Department of Transportation v. Freeman
378 N.W.2d 241 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1985)
Perkins v. Peacock
58 N.W.2d 536 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1953)
Manns v. Marinette & Menominee Paper Co.
235 N.W. 426 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1931)
Ketchum Coal Co. v. Pleasant Valley Coal Co.
168 P. 86 (Utah Supreme Court, 1917)
McLean v. District Court of the Eighth Judicial District
134 P. 536 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1913)
City of Tacoma v. Nisqually Power Co.
103 P. 49 (Washington Supreme Court, 1909)
Burlington & Colorado Railroad v. Colorado Eastern Railroad
45 Colo. 222 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1909)
In re Salter
106 N.W. 684 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1906)
In re Hammer
89 N.W. 111 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1902)
Getty v. Schantz
100 F. 577 (Seventh Circuit, 1900)
State ex rel. City of Milwaukee v. Ludwig
82 N.W. 158 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1900)
State ex rel. Meggett v. O'Neill
80 N.W. 447 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
77 N.W. 193, 100 Wis. 538, 1898 Wisc. LEXIS 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-chicago-northwestern-railway-co-v-oshkosh-algoma-black-wis-1898.