Henderson Belt R. v. Dechamp
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 36 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEALS PROM HENDERSON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. Every owner of property in a city holds it subject to the right of the' city to improve its streets, and must submit to any loss or inconvenience occasioned thereby. (Dillon on IVIun.
Read the full summary
Case 36 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEALS PROM HENDERSON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. Every owner of property in a city holds it subject to the right of the' city to improve its streets, and must submit to any loss or inconvenience occasioned thereby. (Dillon on IVIun. Corp., secs. 989-991; Newport Bridge Co. v. Eoote, 9 Bush, 272-3.) 2. It does not appear from the circumstances of the transaction, the object of it, or the language used, that the “damages’5 provided for wore other than the damages recognized by law as recoverable of railroads for occupying a street in a city. Excavations made in conforming to…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HAZELRIGG
delivered the opinion op the court.
The city of Henderson by an ordinance of its common council submitted a proposition to the appellant, the Henderson Belt Railroad Company, embracing the terms and conditions upon which the company might construct and operate its railway on certain streets of the city.
The company accepted the conditions and constructed its road.
The track was to be constructed on a grade'fixed by the council, the ties were not to bo elevated above the surface of the street, and the whole was to be so maintained and operated as not to obstruct travel. Many…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Elizabethtown, Lexington & Big Sandy Railroad v. CombsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1874
3Cited by4 opinions
- Stein v. C. & O. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
- Ill. Cent. Ry. Co. v. ElliotCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
- Transfer & Bridge Co. v. KleymeierCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1899
- Trustees of Cincinnati Southern Railroad v. HanksCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932