Georgia, Railway Co. v. Ridlehuber

Citations

• 38 S.C. 308
• 17 S.E. 24
• 1893 S.C. LEXIS 61

Syllabus

<p>1. Decree — Additional Grounds. — Where the Circuit Judge dismissed a complaint because the relief demanded should be sought in another proceeding, this court cannot consider questions as to the merits, urged as grounds in support of the judgment, which, though taken in the court below, were not there passed upon.</p> <p>2. Right of Way — Powers of Clerk’s Jury. — The provisions of the statute law of this State, as to right of way for railroads (Gen. Stat., $$ 1550 — 15G1), only govern the manner of claiming the right, and the mode by which the amount of compensation is to be ascertained, where the right to compensation is conceded, or has been already otherwise determined. But the statute Jaw has prescribed no mode by which the disputed right of a land owner to compensation for the land over which a railroad has been constructed can be determined.</p> <p>3. Ibid. — Ibid.—Appeal.—The jury empaneled to determine the amount of compensation, not being presided over by any officer who is competent to instruct them in matters of law, are not expected to determine the right of the land owner to compensation; and on appeal from their finding, the appellate tribunal can only consider the matters which were passed upon by the jury.</p> <p>4. Cases Criticised — Homestead—Agricultural Lien. — Distinction pointed out between this case and cases arising under homestead and agricultural lien proceedings.</p> <p>5. Right of Way — Right to Compensation — Trial.—There being no statutory provision by which a railroad corporation can raise the issue of a land owner’s right to compensation for lands occupied by such railroad, it may have the question of right determined in an action instituted by itself in the Court of Common Pleas, to enjoin the land owner from proceeding to have the amount of compensation ascertained under the statute.</p>