Court Opinion

ID: 9417786
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 20:36:59.845136+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:49.874049
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Brewer,
concurring specially: I concur in a reversal of the judgments below but not in all the conclusions reached in the foregoing opinion, nor in the direction to enter judgment for the defendant. I think the estoppel relied on goes only to the ground actually occupied by the railroad company with its tracks, station houses and other buildings used exclusively for railroad purposes, and does not extend to the entire four hundred feet of the right of way which the company claims under the Congressional grant. It may be that a large portion of this tract is in only the constructive possession of the company, or it may be occupied by the buildings not used exclusively for railroad purposes, and as to all such ground I do not think any 'estoppel extends.
I am also of the opinion that the legal title conveyed by the town site patent and the deed to plaintiff must prevail in this action at law over any equities the company may have acquired by occupancy.
Me. Justice Harlan dissented.