Sample v. Board of County Commissioners

Citations

• 108 Kan. 498
• 196 P. 440
• 1921 Kan. LEXIS 206

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Removal op Bridge — Taking of Private Property — Compensation Should Be Made. Under the circumstances stated in the opinion, removal by the board of county commissioners of a bridge furnishing the sole means of ingress to and egress from the plaintiffs’ farm, would constitute a taking of property, for which compensation should be made.</p> <p>2. Same — Giving Plaintiffs Access to Farm Over Another Road — No Compensation for Loss of Bridge. Deprivation of property would not be avoided by giving the plaintiffs access to their farm by means of a road established under a statute which required them to pay expense of the road proceeding, damages resulting from opening the road, cost of constructing the road, including grading and bridging, and expense of maintaining the road.</p> <p>3. Same — No Money Compensation for Loss of Bridge Available to Plaintiffs — Injunction. The legislature has made no provision for compensation for deprivation of property under the circumstances disclosed, no action for damages is available to the plaintiffs, and consequently they are qualified to enjoin removal of the bridge.</p> <p>■4. Same — Remedy by Injunction — No Equitable Estoppel. Conduct of the plaintiffs and of the board of county commissioners considered, and held, the plaintiffs were not estopped in equity from invoking the .remedy of injunction.</p>