Opinion ID: 361017
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Validity and Effect of the Eminent Domain Clause in the Mortgage.

Text: 19 The trial judge, as we have seen, held both that the clause did not apply under the facts of this case and that, if it did apply, it was invalid. We need not decide the latter question. We very much doubt that the clause, if applicable, is invalid. However, we do not decide the question because we agree with the trial judge that the clause does not apply to this case. 20 The clause deals with a situation in which a mortgaged property shall be taken under the right of eminent domain and the disposition of all compensation for the portion taken and the damages to the remaining portion. Here, although the Railroad filed an action to condemn, the action was never tried, and never went to judgment. On the contrary, the Millers contracted with the Railroad to sell the right of way to the Railroad and to receive a certain amount of money in return. This is not literally the taking of property under the right of eminent domain nor compensation for such a taking. The clause was drafted by the Bank, and under well established principles it is to be construed against the Bank. Under these circumstances, we agree with the trial judge that the clause does not apply to this case, and we decide nothing about its validity if it did apply. 21