Quigley v. Montgomery & Chester Electric Railway Co.

Citations

• 208 Pa. 238
• 57 A. 512
• 1904 Pa. LEXIS 735

Syllabus

<p>Street railways — Agreement with landowner as to right of way — Damages.</p> <p>Where a landowner grants in writing to a street railway the use of a strip of land through a meadow, and subsequently the company orally agrees to pay him compensation for cutting up the meadow in reaching the strip, the landowner is entitled to recover such compensation, although under the written agreement alone apart from the oral agreement he would have had no claim to compensation.</p> <p>In an action against a street railway company by a landowner who had granted a right of way over his land, the statement averred “ that the defendant .... otherwise so constructed said railway as to do great damage and injury to plaintiff’s property.” At the trial plaintiff introduced evidence of damages resulting from the severance of a three-cornered lot from the other land in the construction of the railway. There was also evidence from which the jury could determine the value of the lot. The defendant did not ask for a bill of particulars or any more definite description of the damages. Held, that the averment in the statement was sufficient to cover the testimony presented, and that the court was justified in refusing to charge that plaintiff was not entitled to damages for the cutting off of the lot.</p>