Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co. v. Elliott
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Ray Circuit Court.— IIon. J. M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The plaintiff was entitled to have the report of the commissioners set aside, and a jury trial ordered as a constitutional right. Const., art. 12, see. 4; Railroad v. Almeroth, 13 Mo. App. 91; Railroad v. Story, 96 Mo. 611; Ptisey’s Appeal, 83 Pa.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ray Circuit Court.— IIon. J. M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The plaintiff was entitled to have the report of the commissioners set aside, and a jury trial ordered as a constitutional right. Const., art. 12, see. 4; Railroad v. Almeroth, 13 Mo. App. 91; Railroad v. Story, 96 Mo. 611; Ptisey’s Appeal, 83 Pa. St. 67; Turnpike Co. v. Burket, 26 Ind. 53; Isom v. Railroad, 36 Miss. 200; Stewart v. Baltimore, 7 Md. 500; Kimball x>. Railroad, 35 Mo. 255; People v. McRoberts, 62 111. 38 ; Mitchell v. Railroad, 68 111. 286; People v. Stewart, 97111.123; Railroad v. Hock, 118 111. 587. (2) The…
1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.
This was a proceeding to condemn property fór a railroad right of way. Commissioners Were duly appointed to assess damages. To their report the company filed exceptions contending, among other things, that the damages were excessive and praying for a reassessment by a jury. After hearing much evidence the court overruled the exceptions, and, hence, this appeal.
We have held on several occasions that in proceedings like this either party is entitled, as a matter of constitutional right, to have the damages reassessed by a jury. The court should have awarded a jury upon demand made…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
3Cited by1 opinion
- Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co. v. ElliottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893