Louisiana & A. Ry. Co. v. Moseley

Citations

• 117 La. 313
• 41 So. 585
• 1906 La. LEXIS 695

Syllabus

<p>1. Expropriation — Procedure—Trial oe Exceptions.</p> <p>Expropriation proceedings are to he tried summarily, and a defendant who waits until the jurors have been assembled, and the case has been called for trial to present an exception involving questions of fact as well as law, has no right to insist upon a separate trial of the same before the judge.</p> <p>2. Appeal — Harmless Error.</p> <p>Where, in an expropriation case, an exception is referred to the merits, and the question involved is ‘afterwards presented to and ruled on by the judge in connection with applications for special charges and for a new trial, and the rulings so made, being brought up on the appeal, are affirmed, the exceptor has no just cause of complaint.</p> <p>3. Expropriation — Loss oe Right.</p> <p>The fact that a number of citizens guaranty a railroad company that property needed for its terminal facilities shall not cost beyond a certain amount does not devest the company of its right to proceed for the expropriation of such property.</p> <p>4. Same — Tenement Houses.</p> <p>The requirement, contained in Oiv. Code, art. 2637, concerning the expropriation of the-“dwelling house, yard, garden and other appurtenances,” is not intended to be applied to a tenement bought, and held merely as an investment, and which the owner himself has-never occupied as a dwelling.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — Eor cases in point, see vol. 18, Cent. Dig. Eminent Domain, §§ 122, 123.J</p> <p>5. Appeal — Review—Verdict.</p> <p>Where two juries in an expropriation proceeding- have assessed damages at about _ the same amount, and their verdicts are sustained by a preponderance of the evidence, there is no reason why this court should disturb the-last verdict.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>