People ex rel. Robinson v. Pittsburgh R.R.
People ex rel. Robinson v. Pittsburgh R.R.
Opinion of the Court
The demurrer to the complaint was improperly sustained. In its proceedings for the condemnation of Los Medanos Rancho for railway purposes, the defendant (assuming to exercise the eminent domain) purported to act as agent of the State in the appropriation of private property for public use. It now appears by the complaint, however, that this assumption was a mere false pretense; that the use for which these lands were taken was, in fact, a mere private use, and one to which the eminent domain is of course inapplicable. The proceedings in condemnation amounted to an imposition upon the Court before which they were had.
It is certainly competent for the State, upon discovering the misuse of its authority, whereby the private property of one of its citizens has been wrongfully taken for the private use of another, to interpose by its Attorney-General to correct the abuse.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded, with directions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint. Remittitur forthwith.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- THE PEOPLE ex rel. ROBINSON v. THE PITTSBURGH RAILROAD COMPANY
- Cited By
- 8 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Misuse of the Eminent Domain by Imposition upon the Covet.— The Pittsburg Coal Company owned mines five miles distant from the San Joaquin River, and in order to secure convenient transportation for its coal, the Pittsburg Railway Company was incorporated by the stockholders of the coal company. The articles of incorporation declared the purpose of the new company to be to transport freight and passengers. Upon this representation, and in the belief that the land was required for a public use, the District Court, by the usual judicial proceeding, authorized the corporation to take land, which was the private land of R, for its railway. The rail•way was constructed and was operated exclusively for the transportation of the coal—no passenger or other cars being provided for the use of the public: held, that the proceedings in condemnation amounted to an imposition upon the Court.—[Reporter.] Same—Right of the State to Correct the Abuse.—In such a case, it is competent for the State, upon discovering the misuse of its authority by which private property has been wrongfully taken, to interpose, by its Attorney-General, to correct the abuse.—[Reporter.]