The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-01-31
Halls or JUSTICE.
Decree in Favor OF the g. and %. ha'iroA''
other Court News.

Cffg Circuit Court: Judge William ?. p Or
ton be ore whom the question nas y..s,,r..r
fuied since Monday. sustained tne ue' a,sss ~
to The plaintiffs declara. l a III Decatur
Axtell. receiver OF the Nchm0ha on" ~"
ghany railroad Company. ,..,x,a 20 with
eThis case Il one that will be looked 70 WIZ
much interest. as there are o,ners " os,,nties
natnre pendfng both mere ana IN lie c"u"'
LONG me line Of the Allegheny falHosu. g.,
me nlafptiff's claim Is based upon ln ., rs,
lowing grounds; That when the JAM l,,,,1 10
and Kanawha company was 'aanoi IL
Condemn land for the use OF the c apet, h he
charter required its assessors 10 90 upo,,, 49,
,ro-nises nd make condemnation 'ahIi.,s
In 10 consideration TIE quautliy aiu , sHancing
oftbe land condemned the A1ul -. ne lands
reouired. and the other damag : 70 ti'e No. 10
through which condemnation was 49,
mad due regard being PAID 10 tuS ,,,o ti,,,
euces .Sc: that when the conue'ii,l r 80,
Us 80 made. the viewers VINO "iils tt,
" 1911 f,r a canal reported that IN cohsl"c-
= ti"r of the canal taking the place Oh y ielloe
no damages were allowed TOT tue lc.iN -,
required by the statute; ihat an 'uls 49,,
"a fhe charter OF the company maue uclo
,6ts condemnation allowed the proprietor !"
nave compensation for any addluonul ~
furics not then fOreseen th"t ai
Tho land was condemned loi Nettt
49, damages only were considered MulVH
,,,o,,id follow from canal, that when inc ca
nal went down and I'm IFS place was suD',l'u
led "a railroad, additional huideHs-suS" -"
fanffuW danger from UIts 81 N'A' pm
upou the land. ana these burdens never
in, been paid for, and no condensation nay
in,, pnsscd. the holder OF the same WIS li',lI
therefor: thst this right Is O'sed upon .no
constitutional provision thal pIF"le Pl..t,.
~ cannot be taken for puulic use Wlihvut lu0
CONDENSATION: hat even IL the company otls-
inaliv took a Zee. which is denied u lODh ION, "
fee conditioned upon the use Oh tilt p,Dl,,,sS
COR the purpose for when u was colic III N,
and condensation made; and that rs lne , uv,
fenuant was using 10 for purpose oihci tH ~,
That for which 10 was condemned ne WIS ny
bl. i'm damages, not Onls under the anl,.i i,
/ neut TO the cOmpany's charter. nut uiut'
/ no priuciple of a liability for change OF use
/ me plaintin further alleged speclnc oaHi
aee. Tor which right oi acbon vas 'Nt, ~
and SET out the defendants appolhulltu ~ g. a.
/ The defendant demulred; alleglh- thhl 'iD
declaration was Hoi In proper form, ana no
prounI faction was set cut Tor Wulch tlc
defendant was liable. tina the James NY CO.
and kanaWhu Company Oil2lnaiiN t""N ="
| Zee simple. and that in the hands OF inc u,
PENDANT 10 could not be questlones. ano
| mat there was no cause of action against
him. s a..
| fandaui stated tnat while DE thought lueit
va, possible giouud originally Tor the ciaili
of compensation, the assignment had NOT
carried the claim. -
The puintih was rcpi esented 10y ltutner-
| foord and r1ge. and Wills B smith fsqr
and the defendant hy Thomas :. Martin ESD
/ Frank ". Christian, Esq. and Colonel W.
! Gordon.
/ Inn thc suit Of lurn AGAINST the Richmond
and Petcr,bur. railroad for Iuiniy the plain
rF clnimcd 10 have suffered hF the loss oI
| three months time hv tNe collision oI TWO
/ trains ON the James river bridge 40 re maui
| guriu0u of the Lee monument last May, lhr
] Jury give verdict OF 5000 Motion was
made fo override on the ground that ihe YER
/ diet was excessive. Time was taken To COM
| slider.
Suyreue can't VI Appeals-Nemon against