Pratt v. City of Cleveland

Citations

• 191 F. 65
• 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 5523

Syllabus

<p>1. Railroads (§ 113*) — Tracks—Relocation—Abutting Property Owner— Damages.</p> <p>Under the general law relating to the authority of a railroad, company to relocate its tracks, no right of action arises in favor of an abutting property owner who in consequence of the relocation suffers diminution in value or loss from his inability thereafter to connect his property by switches or otherwise with the railroad tracks.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. §§ 351-361: Dec.' Dig. § 113.*]</p> <p>2. Railroads (§ 99*) — Grade Crossings — Abolition—Damages to Property Owner.</p> <p>Rev. St. Ohio § 3337 — 9, with reference to the abolition of railroad grade crossings, provides that all claims for damages must be iiled as provided by section 2315. Section 3337 — 10 provides that the ordinance for the improvement shall contain a statement of damages claimed, or likely to accrue. Section 3337 — 12 declares that the cost of the improvement including the cost of land purchased or appropriated and damages to abutting property shall be apportioned according to a prescribed mode, and section 3337 — 15 provides that all claims for damages filed according to section 3337 — 9 shall be assessed and determined according to sections 2316-2326, inclusive. Held, that the damages referred to were the damages sustained to property abutting the street, and not to property abutting the railroad, and that the statute did not contemplate an allowance either against the city or the railroad company of incidental damages to an owner of property abutting the railroad resulting from his inability thereafter to connect his property with the railroad by switches' as he had been previously enabled to do.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. §§ 293-304; Dec. Dig. § 99.*]</p>