Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Sevier County
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Concurrence
CONCURRING OPINION.
Wood, J.
The Chief Justice and the writer concur in the judgment for the reason that the proposed highway does not invade any land of appellant that is now in actual use as yards. The county surveyor testified concerning this, in effect, that the appellants had indicated the yard limits hy a sign painted on a post, which post was a considerable distance north of the proposed road; that the sign, “yard limits,” had been at the same place north of the proposed highway for fifteen or twenty years; that the proposed road was nine hundred and twelve feet north of the last switch…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- City of Terre Haute v. Evansville & Terre Haute RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. BogertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Cochran v. WilsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
- Baltimore & Ohio & Chicago Railroad v. NorthIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- City of Fort Wayne v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1892
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.