Cincinnati, La Fayette & Chicago Railroad v. Danville & Vincennes Railway Co.

Citations

• 75 Ill. 113

Syllabus

<p>1. Corporation—when de facto. Where there was a law author-' izing the formation of railroad companies, under which articles of association were prepared and filed with the Secretary of State, who issued the certificate provided for, and there was an user of the franchise purporting to be invested with the association, and the road was built and used under this authority: Held, that the association became a de facto corporation, and neither the eligibility of the directors nor the rightfulness of the existence of the corporation could be questioned collaterally in a suit by the company.</p> <p>2. Injunction—to prevent taking possession under fraudulent legal proceedings. Where one railroad company instituted proceedings to condemn and take for its road the road and track of another de facto railroad company, but concealed the object and purpose, and gaye the latter company no notice, and the whole proceeding showed it was but the carrying out of a scheme for the fraudulent and inequitable purpose of getting possession of such company’s right of way and road without making compensation : Held, that a court of equity would restrain the taking of possession under such fraudulent proceedings.</p> <p>3. Right op wat—description of property in proceedings. One railway company cannot condemn the right of way of another de facto company which is in the undisputed and quiet possession of its road, and operating its trains over the same, for even a qualified or conjoint use, without describing it in the petition as such right of way, and alleging inability to agree as to compensation. The describing of the tracts of land simply over which such prior way is located, making no reference to the other road or company, will not authorize the condemnation of such prior right of way.</p>