Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

W. C. St. Ry. Co. v. City of Chicago, 172 III. 198.
Davis v. Northwestern "L" Ry. Co., 170 III. 595.
C. & A. R. R. Co. v. City of Pontiac, 169 III. 155.
Baecker v. City of Naperville, 166 Ill. 151.

Met. “L” R. R. Co. v. Dickinson, 161 III. 22. Where the verdict returned by the jury in condemning a right of way is so clearly excessive as to show prejudice or passion it will be set aside.

C. & A. R. R. Co. v. Scott, 225 Ill. 352.
When verdict in condemnation is not excessive.

I. I. & M. Ry. Co. v. Humiston, 208 III. 100.

Judgment in.
One not a party not bound by.

Sanitary Dist. v. Met. “L” Ry. Co., 241 III. 622.
When certain enough.

P. B. & C. T. Co. v. Vance, 234 III. 36. A condemnation judgment for damages to property taken or injured takes precedence of a mortgage and of rights of a subsequent purchaser.

Epling v. Dickson, 170 III. 329. Condemnation judgments for damages draw interest as other judgments.

Epling v. Dickson, 170 III. 329. Statute of limitations does not apply to judgments for damages allowed in condemnation proceedings—may be enforced within twenty years.

Epling v. Dickson, 170 III. 329. That private persons may pay part of the cost of condemnation proceedings, does not affect the judgment.

C. B. & Q. R. R. Co. v. City of Naperville, 169 Ill. 25. One condemnation judgment, not lapsed or vacated, is a bar to subsequent proceedings against same property. New condemnation may be had if prior judgment is not in force.

Pearce v. City of Chicago, 169 III. 631.
C. R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. City of Chicago, 148 III. 479.

[ocr errors]

Compensation in condemnation must be found by the regular jury panel. Sec. 6, Eminent Domain, refers only to proceedings in vacation.

Davis v. Northwestern El. Ry. Co., 170 III. 595.

Instructions as to.

Erroneous instructions as to measure of damages in condemnation, outlined and discussed.

C. B. & D. Ry. Co. v. Kelley, 221 Ill. 498.
Erroneous instruction in condemnation proceedings.

C. & S. L. Ry. Co. v. Kline, 220 Ill. 334. An instruction as to form of verdict in condemnation held reversible error.

C. T. T. R. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 217 Ill. 343.
Evidence and instructions in condemnation.

Sexton v. U. S. Yard Co., 200 Ill. 244.
C. & A. R. R. Co. v. Scott, 232 Ill. 419.
South Park Commissioners v. Ayer, 237 Ill. 211.
H. & S. R. R. Co. v. Nolte, 243 Ill. 594.

Verdict.

The verdict in condemnation will stand where the jury viewed the premises, the evidence is conflicting and the damages within the range of the testimony.

Pullman Co. v. City of Chicago, 224 Ill. 248.
I. I. & M. Ry. Co. v. Ring, 219 III. 91.
Hartshorn v. Ill. Valley Ry. Co., 216 III. 392.
Brown v. I. I. & M. Ry. Co., 209 Ill. 402.
St. L. & O'F. Ry. Co. v. Union Bank, 209 I11. 457.
I. I. & M. Ry. Co. v. Humiston, 208 Ill. 100.
G. & S. R. R. Co. v. Herman, 206 Ill. 34.
E. & W. I. Ry. Co. v. Miller, 201 111. 413.
Sexton v. Union S. Y, Co., 200 Ill. 244.
Guyer v. D. R. I. & N. W. Ry. Co., 196 III. 370.
C. T. T. Ry. Co. v. Bugbee, 185 Ill. 353.
G. & G. E. Ry. Co. v. Milroy, 181 III. 243.
R. I. & P. R. R. Co. v. Leisy Brwg. Co., 174 III. 547.

W. C. St. Ry. Co. v. City of Chicago, 172 III. 198.
Davis v. Northwestern "L" Ry. Co., 170 III. 595.
C. & A. R. R. Co. v. City of Pontiac, 169 Ill. 155.
Baecker v. City of Naperville, 166 Ill. 151.

Met. “L” R. R. Co. v. Dickinson, 161 Ill. 22. Where the verdict returned by the jury in condemning a right of way is so clearly excessive as to show prejudice or passion it will be set aside.

C. & A. R. R. Co. v. Scott, 225 Ill. 352.
When verdict in condemnation is not excessive.

I. I. & M. Ry. Co. v. Humiston, 208 III. 100.

Judgment in.
One not a party not bound by.

Sanitary Dist. v. Met. "L" Ry. Co., 241 III. 622.
When certain enough.

P. B. & C. T. Co. v. Vance, 234 Ill. 36. A condemnation judgment for damages to property taken or injured takes precedence of a mortgage and of rights of a subsequent purchaser.

Epling v. Dickson, 170 III. 329. Condemnation judgments for damages draw interest as other judgments.

Epling v. Dickson, 170 III. 329. Statute of limitations does not apply to judgments for damages allowed in condemnation proceedings—may be enforced within twenty years.

Epling v. Dickson, 170 III. 329. That private persons may pay part of the cost of condemnation proceedings, does not affect the judgment.

C. B. & Q. R. R. Co. v. City of Naperville, 169 III. 25. One condemnation judgment, not lapsed or vacated, is a bar to subsequent proceedings against same property. New condemnation may be had if prior judgment is not in force.

Pearce v. City of Chicago, 169 Ill. 631.
C. R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. City of Chicago, 148 Ill. 479.

Condemnation-judgment does not cure illegal proceedings.

Tudor v. S. S. R. T. Ry. Co., 164 Ill. 73 (79). Condemnation of part of railroad right of way for a streetjudgment in one case bars subsequent new proceedings.

I. C. R. R. Co. v. City of Champaign, 163 Ill. 524.

Appeal—Pleading and Practice on.

The fact that an appeal would be burdensome to an owner of a small piece of land is not sufficient cause for a separate trial, in condemnation, as to that piece.

Martin v. C. & M. Elev. Ry. Co., 220 Ill. 97. Reversal of a condemnation judgment on ground that the record shows that the petitioner's road and one purchased by it are competing lines is not res adjudicata on that point. Further evidence may be heard on a new trial.

Ill. State Trust Co. v. St. L. I. M. & S. Ry. Co., 217 Ill. 504. To raise a motion to dismiss condemnation proceedings, overruled below, the motion must be preserved in the Bill of Exceptions.

Cella v. C. & W. I. R. R. Co., 217 111. 326. Condemnation judgment is not subject to review by writ of error, but by appeal only.

Sweeney v. Chicago Tel. Co., 212 III. 475. On appeal from condemnation judgment by the property owner, the petitioner may enter the premises on giving bond. (Sec. 13, Eminent Domain.)

Davis v. Northwestern EI. R. R. Co., 170 III. 596.

C. B. & Q. R. R. Co. v. Naperville, 169 Ill. 25. Condemnation appeals go directly to Supreme Court. (Eminent Domain Act, Sec. 12.)

West Side “LCo. v. Siegel, 161 Ill. 638. Plea of release of errors is necessary in condemnation case in Supreme Court, to defeat an appeal—when.

West Side "L" Co. v. Siegel, 161 III. 638.

On appeal by railroad company from condemnation judgment awarding damages to it, a decree dissolving an injunction to restrain construction of the road will be affirmed, where the award is affirmed.

Johnson v. Met. W. S. "L" Co., 160 III. 477. Procedure on reversal of a judgment of condemnation without remanding—withdrawal of deposit made pending decision on appeal.

Ligare v. C. M. & N. Ry. Co., 160 III. 530. Affirmance of judgment of condemnation on appeal is affirmance of order of possession.

C. & N. W. Ry. Co. v. Town of Cicero, 157 III. 89.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »