Boston & Maine Railroad v. County Commissioners
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions, and motion to set aside the verdict and for new-trial. These two cases were appeals to this court from awards of.' land damages, made by the county commissioners, to the corporations for the taking of a portion of their lands, and crossing, their railroads at grade, by the location of a county way three-rods in width. Both were tried together.
Read the full summary
On exceptions, and motion to set aside the verdict and for new-trial. These two cases were appeals to this court from awards of.' land damages, made by the county commissioners, to the corporations for the taking of a portion of their lands, and crossing, their railroads at grade, by the location of a county way three-rods in width. Both were tried together. Appellants asked the court to give the jury the following instructions as applicable to the claim of the Boston and Maine-Railroad, viz.: (1.) "A railroad corporation across whose road another railroad or a highway is laid out, has the…
1Opinion of the CourtEmery, J.
The county commissioners of York county laid out and established a county road, crossing at grade, the tracks of both the appellant railroad companies, and made an appraisal of the damages sustained by each company from the necessary appropriation of its land within the limits of its location. The railroad companies appealed, and the question of damages was tried before a jury in this court.
The bill of exceptions presents practically only two questions, one raised by the first three exceptions, and the other by the fourth exception. The solution of these two questions will dispose of all the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Beer Co. v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Stone v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Butchers' Union Slaughter-House & Live-Stock Landing Co. v. Crescent City Live-Stock Landing & Slaughter-House Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Thorpe v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
3Cited by32 opinions
- Health Department v. Rector of Trinity ChurchNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- State ex rel. City of Minneapolis v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- The Alexander Co. v. City of OwatonnaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
- Baxter v. Waterville Sewerage DistrictSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1951
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.