Snyder v. Warford & Thomas
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to Howard Circuit Court. The plaintiff insists, that except the limitation which the Constitution imposes upon a man’s real estate — that of being taken for public use — that he owns it subject to his own will and pleasure, as to sale or disposition, while not in debt.
Read the full summary
ERROR to Howard Circuit Court. The plaintiff insists, that except the limitation which the Constitution imposes upon a man’s real estate — that of being taken for public use — that he owns it subject to his own will and pleasure, as to sale or disposition, while not in debt. In the 4th volume of Kent’s commentajies, page 5, it is declared, that “every restraint upon alienation is inconsistent with the nature of a fee simple,” and that “no person is capable op having a greater estate or interest in land.” The quantity of land taken is not the criterion by which the right is to be judged. If…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
The only object of the pleadings in this case was to bring up the question of the constitutionality of an act of the Legislature, passed March *51424, 1845, entitled “An act to enable persons to secure the right of way in certain cases.” It is unnecessary to state the pleadings in detail. The action was trespass, and a special plea was put in by the defendants, justifying the trespass under a right of way, established according to the provisions of the abovementioned act. A demurrer was filed and overruled and judgment for the defendants.
The statute in question is thought to be unconstitutional, as…
2Cited by14 opinions
- St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railway Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Bankhead v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
- Humes v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Yunker v. NicholsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1872
- Nesbitt v. TrumboIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.