Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1905-04-21
DOCTRINE ESTOPPEL
APPLIED BY COURT
In Opinion Denying Writ Against DaV-
export, Rock Island & North
western.

Justice Cartwright gave the opinion
in the affirmation of the supreme court
of the decision of the circuit court here
in denying writ of mandamus on pc
tition of Capt J. NJ Beardsley TO COM
pei the city TO cause the removal of
the Davenport, Rock Island & North
western Railway company's depots on
West Seventeenth street. on the ground
that the street was encroached upon
The opinion would fill about four col
umns. The concluding paragraphs
point out the justice of the railroad
company's claim, and are as follows:
1T has frequently been decided that
the doctrine of estoppel in pals is ap
plicable 10 municipal corporations, but
| that they will be estopped or not. as
justice and right may require. There
may be cases where under all the cir
cumstances, to assert a public right
would be to encourage and promote a
| fraud Where a party acting in good
faith under affirmative acts OF city
has made such expensive and perma-
nent Improvements as it would be
highly inequitable and unjust to de-
stroy the rights acquired, the doctrine
of equitable estoppel will be applied
The hardships that would result from
contrary holding, and the necessity
of raising an estoppel in particular
cases to prevent fraud and injustice,
have induced the establishment of the
rule, and it has been several times said
that there is neither danger to the pub
lie nor injustice in the application of
the doctrine. In the exercise of proper
diligence the public authorities may pre-
vent cncroachments upon public right
and if they do not. any citizen may
take the necessary steps to do so, and
if there is not only failure 10 act by
either. but affirmative action by the
public authorities with the apparent
approval of everyone interested. I'M
der which the situation is changed and
permanent improvements are made, the
principles of equity require that the
public should be eStOpped. We
think this a proper case for the appli-
cation of the doctrine. Public improve
ments and great expenditures have
been made which would not have been
made but for the positive action of the
city and its officers. and To compel the
abandonment of the premises for use
las depot grounds woulG be contrary to
natural justice. The relator cannot
demand the writ of mandamus as an
absolute right. but it is to be granted
or withheld in the exercise of a sound
judicial discretion. in view of all the
circumstances. The facts alleged in
the answers as creating an estoppel,
and the fact that the public use and
convenience were fully provided for by
a street of at least the ordinary width.
which was wholly unobstructed, were
admitted. From such facts it appears
that the public good would not be pro-
NOTED in any substantial way by grant
ing the writ, but, on the contrary, that
the representatives of the public have
always considered, and still consider,
the present location of the station
grounds as best for the convenience
of the public. The fact that there is
an unobstructed street so feet wide.
fully accommodating public travel. does
not affect any legal right to the re-
mainder, but 1t is a circumstance prop
er to be considered in exercising the
discretion cOnfided to the court.
In view of all the facts and circum-
stances, we think the court did not err
in denying the writ. The judgment is
affirmed"