Mifflin Bridge Co. v. County of Juniata
Citations
- 144 Pa. 365
- 22 A. 896
- 1891 Pa. LEXIS 622
Syllabus
<p>1. When a bridge is taken by a county for public use, under the act of May 8, 1876, P. L. 131, and its supplements, the measure of damages is the value of the property to the owners, not to the county taking it; and the property so to be valued includes not only the bridge structure but also the company’s franchises.</p> <p>2. The value of the structure, the amount of net tolls collected upon it, and the market value of the capital stock of the bridge company are all elements to be considered in ascertaining the value of the bridge and its corporate franchises; no one of them, however, standing alone would in all cases furnish a test.</p> <p>3. A bridge having been taken by a county soon after the rebuilding thereof, and a witness who had taken the contract for the superstructure being called for the bridge company to testify to the value thereof, an objection that the witness should be asked to state the contract price, instead of an estimate of value, was not well taken.</p> <p>4. The true question was the value of the bridge, not what it cost; and the county was bound to pay for it at its actual value at the time of the taking. Nor, was it error to reject an offer to cross-examine the witness as to the contract price of the bridge, and what its construction had cost the company.</p> <p>5. The cost of repairing and enlarging the piers, in connection with the rebuilding of the bridge after its destruction by a flood, was irrelevant; and an offer by the county to show the entire cost of such repairing and enlarging the piers, “as evidence to show the value of the property taken by the defendant,” was properly rejected.</p> <p>6. An offer by the county to show what it could have erected a new bridge for, was irrelevant. Having taken the bridge of the plaintiff company, in preference to erecting a new bridge itself, the county was bound to pay for the bridge, so taken, at its value to the company from which it was taken.</p> <p>7. The value of the capital stock of
Judges: Clark, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.