Teass v. City of St. Albans

19 L.R.A. 802, 17 S.E. 400, 38 W. Va. 1, 1893 W. Va. LEXIS 39
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 22, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by40 cases

This text of 19 L.R.A. 802 (Teass v. City of St. Albans) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Teass v. City of St. Albans, 19 L.R.A. 802, 17 S.E. 400, 38 W. Va. 1, 1893 W. Va. LEXIS 39 (W. Va. 1893).

Opinion

Holt, Judue:

This was an injunction brought in the Circuit Court of Kanawha county by plaintifl, Teass, against, the city of St. Albans, to restrain defendant from moving back or [4]*4tearing down plaintiff’s dwelling-house, claimed by the city to be built about four feet into and on one of its Streets. The ex parte injunction was granted 24tli February, 1892, and on final hearing on April 30, 3892, the injunction was dissolved, and this appeal was granted plaintiff’.

The allegations of plaintiff’s bill are, in substance, as follows:

Plaintiff, T. A. Teass, is the owner of a lot on the corner of A. street and Smith street, in the city of St. Albans, fronting on A street seventy seven feet, on which is a valuable dwelling-house, built in 1880 or 1881, more than ten years before the institution of this suit; and plaintiff and those under whom he claims have had continuous adverse possession of the dwelling-house and lot for more than ten years, claiming the same as their own under the various deeds and title papers mentioned. The dwelling-house and the lot on which the same is situate, as now fenced and used, are not in part on A street and in no wise obstruct the public use of the street in question. The council of the city of St. Albans, under its charter, has no legal right to enter upon his premises, and take or remove his dwelling-house or fences, without first having the same condemned pursuant to the statute. And, although the cily council claims that plaintiff and other owners of the lots are occupying parts of the street, they can only recover the same by proper legal proceedings, when their claim is hot admitted but denied by plaintiff and the other owners of the lots.

Plaintiff then charges that the city council have ordered defendant Ed. Wilson, the street-commissioner, to enter upon his premises to remove his fences and his dwelling-house from its present location under the pretended claim that the same are occupying a part of A street of said city; that the street-commissioner claiming to be acting under the orders of the council did with a number of men in the employ of the city enter upon plaintiff’s premises on the 23d day Of February, 1892, without his consent, pulled down his fence on A street, and is now claiming the right, and declaring the intent, to proceed to execute the order of [5]*5the city council, and remove bis dwelling-house from its present position under the pretended claim that it is partly in A street; — that such actings and doings are unlawful;— that the injury to -him would be irreparable, and not com-pensable in damages.

The prayer is that the city of St. Albans, the council thereof, the street-commissioner, Wilson, who are made parties defendant, and all agents and employes of the city, be enjoined and restrained from removing plaintiffs dwelling-house, or otherwise interfering in any manner with his said property or any part thereof, situate ou said A street, until the further order of the court, and for general relief.

On February 24, 1892, the Circuit Court judge in vacation awarded the injunction prayed for until further order on bond, as required, being given. The bond was given, and summons issued to answer the bill. In term time on April 6, 1892, the defendants appeared by counsel and moved the court to dissolve'the injunction; and, it appearing that plaintiff had duo notice of the motion, it was sot down to be heard on April 8, 1892. The defendants at the same time filed their demurrer to the bill and also their joint aud several answer ; aud the demurrer was set down for argument, and plaintiff replied generally to the answer.

The answer is, in substance, as follows: That the lot of land on A street claimed by plaintiff had long .ago been forfeited to the state; that it was forfeited in the name of -- — McDermott, and in the name of Allen M. Smith’s heirs, two parties under whom plaintiff claimed, and through whom he derived his supposed title, and that, by reason of such forfeiture, neither Eggleston, plaintiff’s immediate vendor, nor plaintiff himself, obtained or had any title. Defendants next gave the history of plaintiff's title as being a part of the “A. M. Smith lauds,” at St. Albans; —that in the suit of Hyman, Moses & Co. v. A. M. Smith and others, E. B. Knight, Esq., was appointed a commissioner to sell the Smith lands, and among them a lot bounded on the east by B street., in St. Albans ; on the south, by Main street, which is the old James river aud Kanawha turnpike, as the same runs through the city of St. Albans; —that, acting under the decree of sale, ouelh B. Reynolds, [6]*6an engineer, at the instance of Knight, commissioner, to sell, laid off the “Smith block” into streets, alleys, and lots; that Knight, as commissioner, sold the lots as thus laid off, and shown on map made and filed as an exhibit— “Map 1that Commissioner Knight sold the subdivided parts of the Smith land here in controversy to one Johnson, Johnson sold to McDermott, McDermott to D. S. Eggleston, and Eggleston to plaintiff'; that A street bounding these lots on the west, was laid off by Engineer Reynolds, and that Knight sold these lo:s, including the one in question, according to the Reynolds map, and dedicated to the public and to the city the said A street, which was soon after accepted by the city of St. Albans, and has ever since been occupied, used and improved by the city as and for a public street and highway for public travel in the city;— that said lots are numbered 21, 22, aiid 23 on street A, making seventy seven feet, and arc called for and described in the deeds of Special Commissioner Knight as lots laid down on the plat of P. B. Reynolds, filed in said court, one of which lots is a part of the real estate belonging to the estate of Allen M. Smith, and fronts twenty seven feet on A street, and runs back a uniform width of twenty seven feet a distance of one hundred and forty four feet, to an alley fifteen feet wide; and so the other two lots, each fronting twenty five feet on A street, an^l running back one hundred and forty four feet to the alley, being lots No. 21, on the corner of Smith and A streets, twenty seven feet front; No. 22, twenty five feet front; and No. 23, twenty five feet front — all making seventy seven feet front on A street; — and that the lots fronting on B street are one hundred and fifty six feet deep, running hack to the sanie fifteen foot alley; that B street, at its proper width, is forty feet wide, is well located and well known, and had been used and travelled for more than thirty years as a public highway, before the city of St. Albans was incorporated— that the same is a proper landmark, and the proper point from which to start to measure in order to determine the location and position of A street; that it is thus one hundred and forty four feet plus fifteen feet (width of alley) and one hundred and fifty six feet from B street to A [7]*7street; that the plat of P. B. Reynolds was made, and said measurements therein, and said lots and alleys were located, by beginning at B street and Main street on the turnpike, and that by beginning at B street, and going east of said lots the proper depth, as called for by said plat and said deeds, and then measuring fifteen feet for an alley, and then measuring on same course out towards Coal river the proper distance called for, as the depth of said lots Nos. 21, 22, and 28, it will leave part of the house now claimed by plaintiff on said A street, one of the public highways of the city, for a distance of about four feet, and that the same constitutes a common and public nuisance to the citizens of the city of St.

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

Related

Sharon Steel Corp. v. City of Fairmont
334 S.E.2d 616 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1985)
Kramp v. Toledo Edison Co.
180 N.E.2d 172 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1961)
Campbell Brown & Co. v. ELKING
93 S.E.2d 248 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1956)
Broadsword v. Kauer
161 Ohio St. (N.S.) 524 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1954)
Huffman v. Mills
46 S.E.2d 787 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1948)
West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. J. Natwick & Co.
21 S.E.2d 368 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1941)
Talo v. Tavai
2 Am. Samoa 63 (High Court of American Samoa, 1939)
Miller v. Town of Seaford
194 A. 37 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1937)
Kron v. Bodmer
249 N.W. 772 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1933)
Abel v. Love
143 N.E. 515 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1924)
Stewart v. Parr
82 S.E. 259 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1914)
City of Elkins v. Donohoe
81 S.E. 1130 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1914)
Donohoe v. Fredlock
79 S.E. 736 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1913)
Lyons v. Fairmont Real Estate Co.
77 S.E. 525 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1912)
Point Mountain Coal & Lumber Co. v. Holly Lumber Co.
75 S.E. 197 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1912)
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. McPhillamey
118 P. 682 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1911)
Harman v. Alt
71 S.E. 709 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1911)
Riffle v. Skinner
67 S.E. 1075 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1910)
Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. City of Belton
122 S.W. 959 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1909)
Lewis v. Yates
59 S.E. 1073 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 L.R.A. 802, 17 S.E. 400, 38 W. Va. 1, 1893 W. Va. LEXIS 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teass-v-city-of-st-albans-wva-1893.