Whitacre v. Saint Paul & Sioux City Railroad
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1959, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Pettingill Theatre Co. v. City of Minneapolis (Minn. 1959)
- Commercial Station Post Office, Inc. v. United States (8th Cir. 1931)
- Ford Motor Co. v. City of Minneapolis (Minn. 1919)
- Mantorville Railway & Transfer Co. v. Teunis Slingerland (Minn. 1907)
- St. Louis, El Reno & Western Railway Co. v. Oliver (Okla. 1906)
- State ex rel. City of St. Paul v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. (Minn. 1902)
- City of Minneapolis v. Wilkin (Minn. 1883)
- City of Minneapolis v. Wilkin (Minn. 1883)
- Sherman v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co. (Minn. 1883)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
What matters were involved for determination on the trial of the appeal herein in the district court depends upon the following statutory provision, which is made a part of defendant’s charter by section 3, e. 73, Sp. Laws 1870: “Appeals shall bring before the appellate court the propriety of the amount of damages in respect to the parties to the appeal, and, unless the parties otherwise agree, the matter shall be submitted to a jury and tried, as other appeal cases are tried, and the court or jury, as the case may be, shall re-assess the damages aforesaid, making the verdict conform to the justice and facts of the case; but the rule for ascertaining and fixing such damages shall be based upon the same principles that the commissioners are required to adopt in originally appraising and determining such damages.”
In construing this and like provisions in the charters of other companies this court has repeatedly held that, upon the trial of such an appeal, the jury is required by its verdict to ascertain and determine the claimant’s damages as of the date of the taking of the property by the company, which is constructively the time when the award of the commissioners is made and filed. In other words, they must re-assess the damages awarded by the commissioners, in respect to the property taken, as of the date of filing the award and with reference to the condition of things then existing. “The whole scope of the appeal is to secure a re-trial of the same matter submitted to and passed upon by the commissioners.” Winona & St. Peter R. Co. v. Denman, 10 Minn. 222, (283;) Murphy v. St. Paul & S. C. R. Co. 19 Minn. 500; Curtis v. St. P. S. & T. F. R. Co. 20 Minn. 33, 34; Sherwood v. St. P. & C. R. Co. 21 Minn. 122, 125; Warren v. F. Div. St. P. & P. R. Co. 21 Minn. 424; Trogden v. W. & St. P. R. Co.
In the absence, then, of anything in the record indicating the contrary, it must be presumed that the verdict in this case diad reference to the amount of damages which the claimant, 'Mrs. Whitacre, was entitled to recover of the company at the ftime the award appealed from was filed, which was the twenty-seventh day of June, 1874. The right of the district court to allow interest upon the amount of such verdict to the time of the entry of judgment thereon is decisively settled by the case of Warren v. F. Div. St. P. & P. R. Co., supra, and need not be further considered. These being the only points made or presented by either party the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.