Watauga & Yadkin River Railroad v. Ferguson

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Watauga & Yadkin River Railroad v. Ferguson, 85 S.E. 156 (N.C. 1915)
169 N.C. 70; 1915 N.C. LEXIS 149
ClaRK

Watauga & Yadkin River Railroad v. Ferguson

Opinion of the Court

ClaRK, C. J.

This is an appeal from an order of the clerk approving the assessment of damages by the commissioners condemning the right of way for the plaintiff under its charter, Private Laws 1905, ch. 411.

Revisal, 2587, provides: “If the said company at the time of the appraisement shall pay into court the sum appraised by the commissioners, then and in that event the said company may enter, take possession, and hold said lands, notwithstanding the pendency of the appeal, and until the final judgment rendered on said appeal.” The charter of the plaintiff, Private Laws 1905, ch. 411, is practically to the same effect as the provision in Revisal, 2567 (4), which provides that the railroad company may lay out its road not exceeding 100 feet in width and construct the road, making compensation therefor as provided by that chapter for lands taken for the use of the company.

Chapter 11, Private Laws 1913, amends this provision of the charter (sec. 4, eh. 411, Pr. Laws 1905) by adding at the end thereof: “after the amount of such compensation shall have been determined by a proceeding instituted either by said railroad company or by the owner of the lands through which the line of said railroad may run; and said railroad company shall not be required to institute proceedings for the *71 condemnation of lands prior to tbe time of entering upon tbe lands of any person for tbe purpose of constructing its line of railroad.” Tbe plaintiff entered upon tbe right of way, constructed its road, and is now operating traffic over tbe same. Tbe defendant relies upon Eevisal, 2566, wbicb provides tbat tbat chapter (cb. 61) “shall govern and control, anything in any special act of the Assembly creating a railroad corporation to tbe contrary, notwithstanding, unless in tbe act of tbe General Assembly tbe section or sections of this chapter intended to be repealed shall be especially referred to by number and, as such, shall be repealed.” This reference was not made in chapter 11, Private Laws 1913, and on motion of tbe defendant tbe court dismissed tbe plaintiff’s appeal upon tbe ground tbat, not having paid into court tbe $800 assessed for damages, tbe plaintiff could not prosecute its appeal.

It is true tbat Eevisal, 2566, was held valid in R. R. v. R. R., 106 N. C., 16, and Liverman v. R. R., 109 N. C., 52, but said section 2566 of tbe Eevisal is like any other act of tbe Legislature and is subject to any subsequent legislation, and is only useful in construing tbe meaning of subsequent legislation when it is doubtful. But it cannot have tbe effect to prevent antagonistic legislation at a subsequent date.

Tbe amendatory act, chapter 11, Private Laws 1913, authorizes tbe plaintiff company to enter “upon the lands of any person for the purpose of constructing its line of railroad” without prior thereto instituting proceedings for condemnation. Tbe power of tbe Legislature to authorize the taking of property under tbe right of eminent domain without requiring tbe precedent payment therefor is discussed and decided in S. v. Lyle, 100 N. C., 497, and has been approved since. See citations in Anno. Ed. It is there held tbat compensation must be provided for to warrant tbe taking, but tbat it need not precede tbe taking, and tbat “tbe owner is confined to tbe special remedy given him by tbe statute under wbicb bis property is seized.”

In S. v. Wells, 142 N. C., 593; Street R. R. v. R. R., ib., 438; S. v. Mallard, 143 N. C., 666, tbe Court held tbat under the general statute a railroad company bad no right to begin tbe construction of its road until tbe payment into court of tbe damages assessed, and tbat its only right prior to payment thereof into court was to enter on tbe right of way merely for tbe purpose of surveying and laying it off, so tbat tbe commissioners might assess damages. But, as we have seen, under tbe amendment to the charter of tbe plaintiff company by chapter 11, Laws 1913, tbe plaintiff could construct its railroad before complying with this requirement. This does not deprive tbe defendant of proceeding to collect tbe compensation assessed on tbe final trial, for until payment therefor tbe title to tbe easement in her bands does not pass to tbe plaintiff company.

Eeversed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Watauga and Yadkin River Railroad Company v. Blanche Ferguson.
Cited By
9 cases
Status
Published