Wilson v. Pittsburg & Lake Erie Railroad
Citations
- 222 Pa. 541
- 72 A. 235
- 1909 Pa. LEXIS 907
Syllabus
<p>Railroads — Eminent domain — Widening road — Water tanks — Act of March 17,1869, P. L. 12.</p> <p>A railroad company duly incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania with power to condemn land for general railroad purposes is invested with the right of eminent domain to take land for the purpose of erecting and maintaining thereon tanks to supply water to its locomotives, engines and trains under the provisions of the Act of March 17, 1869, P. L. 12, giving railroad companies the right to condemn land for the purpose of straightening, widening or otherwise improving their lines.</p> <p>A resolution of the board of directors of a railroad company as to the erection and maintenance of water tanks for railroad purposes stated, at a point mentioned, and upon land designated, is final and conclusive as to the necessity for such improvement, and is within the purview of the act of 1869.</p> <p>Under such a resolution a prima facie right to condemn all of the land described is made out and this prima facie right can only be overcome by evidence which clearly establishes the fact that the railroad company, arbitrarily and without regard to its actual needs, had undertaken to appropriate more land .than its necessities require.</p> <p>Railroads — Eminent domain — Practice, C. P.</p> <p>The court of common pleas is not under any legal obligation to approve a bond tendered in railroad condemnation proceedings, where it does not affirmatively appear, either in the petition or in the notice, or in the bond itself, that the land is to be taken for any purpose for which lands may be acquired by condemnation.</p> <p>Where it appears by the- resolution of the board of directors of a railroad company invested with the power of eminent domain that in their opinion the land is necessary for a specific purpose for which the company may condemn land, and this resolution is made part of the petition for the approval of the bond and the adoption thereof is duly proved or admitted, and t
Judges: Brown, Elicin, Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Potter, Stewart
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.