Legal Opinion

St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway v. Biggs

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 15, 1889PublishedCited by 45 opinions

APPEAL from Hempstead Circuit Court. C. E. Mitchel, Judge. Appellee sued the railway company, and alleged that she owned certain lands lying on Red river, Arkansas, a short distance north of defendant’s railway. That defendant’s railway had been constructed through the Red river bottom in 1873, and had been carelessly and negligently constructed and maintained ever since.

Read the full summary

APPEAL from Hempstead Circuit Court. C. E. Mitchel, Judge. Appellee sued the railway company, and alleged that she owned certain lands lying on Red river, Arkansas, a short distance north of defendant’s railway. That defendant’s railway had been constructed through the Red river bottom in 1873, and had been carelessly and negligently constructed and maintained ever since. That by reason of said railway track having been kept and maintained at a great elevation above the said Red river bottom without sufficient openings, plaintiff’s land had, on the- 17th of April, 1885, been overflowed, and…

1Opinion of the CourtSandels, J.

The alleged nuisance was constructed in 1873. The injury complained of was in 1885. It is argued by the appellant that the statute of limitations began to run against appellee upon the construction of the nuisance. Ry. Co. v. Morris, 35 Ark., 622; and Ry. Co. v. Chapman, 39 Ark., 463, are relied on as establishing this contention. The facts in those cases make them clearly distinguishable from this case.

statute of Limitations; Nuisance. The rules applicable to the recovery of damages for the construction and continuance of nuisances in cases of this kind are stated satisfactorily to this…

2Cited by45 opinions

  1. City Council v. LombardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  2. Ryan v. City of EmmetsburgSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
  3. Harvey v. Mason City & Fort Dodge RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  4. Middelkamp v. Bessemer Irrigating Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1909
  5. Cockrill v. CooperCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898

40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API