Heidegger v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. E. Porterfield, Judge. (1) The consent of the owners of the majority of front feet of property upon the line of the railroad located on public streets was necessary to a franchise to construct, maintain and operate such railway.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. E. Porterfield, Judge. (1) The consent of the owners of the majority of front feet of property upon the line of the railroad located on public streets was necessary to a franchise to construct, maintain and operate such railway. Statutory Charter of 1875; see Laws of Missouri, 1875, p. 209, sec. 8; Kansas City Charter of 1888, sec. 2, art. 12, p. 233; see Charter and Revised Ordinances of 1898; Kansas City Charter of 1908, sec. 4, art. 16, p. 219. (Each of these last two charters have saving clauses and exceptions of existing rights and obligations…
1Opinion of the CourtBroaddus, P. J.
This is a suit, by injunction, to restrain the city of Kansas City, Missouri, and the Metropolitan Street Railway Company, from rerouting the latter’s street cars on what is known as the Vine street line. The line, as now operated under the company’s franchise, extends from Eighteenth street on Vine to Woodland, then to Thirty-first street, thence to its terminus south, at Forty-fifth street. Under the proposed rerouting the cars are to be operated from points south of Woodland avenue to Thirty-first street, thence west to Holmes street, thence north to the business districts of the city, and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McGilvra v. Seattle Electric Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
- Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Co. v. Public Service CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1918