« 이전계속 »
Page State v. Logan (Fla.).
173 State ex rel. Attorney General, Ex parte State, Long v. (Ala. App.). 925 (Ala.)
466 State, Lynn v. (Ala. App.).
925 State ex rel. Davis, Ex parte (Ala.) 917 State, McGimpsey v. (Ala. App.).
628 State Highway Commission, Bouchelle v. State, McGregor v. (Ala. App.). 925 (Ala.)
884 State, McGuire :v. (Miss.)..
285 Steels Bluff Mercantile Co., May v. (Ala.) 923 State, Mallette v. (Ala. App.). 926 Stephens v. Stephens (Fla.).
746 State v. Malone (La.).
788 Stephens Lumber Co., Ange v. (Fla.). 176 State, Maloy v. (Ala. App.). 926 Stevenson v. State (Miss.)
525 State v. Massey (Ala. App.) 625 Steverson, Ex parte (Ala.).
912 State, Matthews v. (Miss.). 18 Steverson, Robinson v. (Ala.).
912 State, May v. (Ala.). 780 Steverson, Robinson v. (Ala. App.).
910 State, Morris v. (Ala. App.).
926 Stewart, Edward Hines Yellow line TrusState, Myrick v. (Ala, App.). 455 tees v. (Miss.).
12 State, Nix V. (Ala. App.).
918 Stewart-Greer Lumber Co., Humble State, O'Neal v. (Miss.). 195 (La.)
243 State, Orick v. (Miss.). 285 Stinson, Richardson v. (Ala.).
209 State, Osborne v. (Fla.).
365 Stoner & Co. v. Blocton Export Coal Co. State, Pace v. (Miss.). 34 (Miss.)
5 State v. Parker (Fla.) 260 Stout y. Limestone County (Ala.).
352 State, Parker v. (Miss.). 606 Straughter v. State (Ala. App.)
926 State, Perry v. (Ala.).. 842 Strickland v. State (Miss.).
184 State v. Pinellas County Power Co. (Fla.) 504 Stroder v. Tuscaloosa (Ala. App.)
926 State, Pinkston v. (Ala. App.).. 926 Sullivan, Austin v. (Miss.)..
275 State v. Poole (La.). 613 Summerlin, Ray v. (Ala.).
482 State, Porter v. (Miss.). 377 Summers v. State (Ala. App.)
456 State, Reeves V. (Ala. App.) 926 Sutton v. Cannon (Miss.)
- 24 State, Robinson v. (Miss.). 377 Swinea, Ex parte (Ala.).
87 State, Rock v. (Ala. App.).. 455 Swinea v, State (Ala.).
87 State, Russell v. (Ala. App.). 926 Swinea v. State (Ala. App.)
86 State, Sampson v. (Ala. App.).
305 State, Savage v. (Ala. App.).
562 State, Scott v. (Ala.)..
Tait, American Ry. Exp. Co. v. (Ala.) 328
926 State v. Sharp (La.)..
569 State v. Sharp (La.)
331 State, Shaw v. (Miss.).
Taylor, America Mining Co. v. (Ala.). 761
927 State, Simpson v. (Ala. App.)
834 State v. Smith (Ala.).
394 State, Smith V. (Fla.).
Taylor, Western Union Tel. Co. v. (Fla.).. 163 State, Smith v. (Miss.).
394 Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Wilhite State, Stevenson v. (Miss.).
135 State, Straughter v. (Ala. App.)
926 Terrell, City of Vicksburg v. (Miss.). 286 State, Strickland v. (Miss.). 181 Terry, Ex parte (Ala.)..
768 State, Summers v. (Ala. App.).
456 Texas & P. R. Co., Jeansonne v. (La.).... 410 State, Swinea V. (Ala.)..
87 Thames, Monroe Stock & Exchange Co. v. State, Swinea v. (Ala. App.).
157 State, Tatum v. (Ala. App.). 569 Thomas, Parrish v. (Fla.).
749 State v. Thompson (Ala.). 756 Thomas, Scott v. (Ala.).
778 State, Thompson v. (Fla.), 527 Thomas v. Thomas (Ala.).
766 State, Tillery v. (Ala. App.). 927 Thomason v. Garic (La.)
47 State, Turner v. (Miss.).
195 Thompson v. Commercial Nat. Bank (La.) 688State, Tyson V. (Fla.).
254 Thompson v. Menefee (Ala.). State v. United Brothers of America and
Thompson, State v. (Ala.).
756 Sisters of True Love (Ala.) 830 Thompson v. State (Fla.).
527 State, Walker v. (Ala. App.). 564 Thompson & Co. v. Vildibili (Ala.)
139 State, Walker v. (Miss.).. 9 Tillery v. State (Ala. App.).
927 State, Webster v. (Ala. App.)
201 T. J. Wilkinson & Son, G. A. Soden & Co. State, Wells v. (Miss.). .
20 State, White v. (Ala. App.)....
927 Town of Forest Park in Hillsborough State, Whitside v. (Ala. App.)
735 State, Wilkinson v. (Ala. App.).
927 Town of Haines City, Bannon v. (Fla.)... 749 State, Williams v. (Ala. App.).
573 Town of Heflin, Beason v. (Ala. App.). 923 State, Williams v., two cases (Ala. App.) 927 Town of Houston, Wright v. (Miss.). 395 State, Williams v. (Miss.).
195 Town of Minden, Carter v. (La.). 536 State, Williams V. (Miss.).
527 T. P. Ranch Co., Gueydan v. (La.). 541 State, Williamson v., two cascs (Miss.). 34 Trahan, Elfant v. (La.)..
404 State, Williamson v. (Miss.). 35 Trichell, Cavell v. (La.).
249 State, Williamson v. (Miss.).
395 Tropical Paint & Oil Co., Tuscaloosa LumState, Wilson v. (Ala.).. 917 ber Co. v. (Ala.). ...
236 State, Wilson v. (Ala. App.). 914 Trost v. Beck (Ala.).
472 State, Windham v. (Ala. App.).
457 Truelsen v. Southern Lumber & Supply State, Wright v. (Ala. App.). 458 Co. (Fla.).
267 State, Young v. '(Ala. App.).
200 Turnbough & Sons, Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. State, Young v. (Ala. App.). 927 (Miss.)
286 State, Youngblood v. (Ala. App.). 87 Turner v. State (Miss.)
195 State ex rel. Attorney General, Ex parte Tuscaloosa Lumber Co. v. Tropical Paint (Ala.) 312 & Oil Co. (Ala.)....
236 State ex rel. Attorney General, Ex parte Tutwiler, Bodeker v. (Ala.).
776 (Ala.) 314 Tyson y. State (Fla.)
(100 So.) Page
Page Ucita Inv. Co., Saussy v. (Fla.)... ... 750 White v. State (Ala. App.)
927 United Brotherhood of Carpenters and White v. White (La.)...
442 Joiners of America, Local No. 1960, Ny- Whitewater Lumber Co. v. Prather (Ala.) 549 land v. (La.).
733 Whitside v. State (Ala. App.).... 927 United Brothers of America and Sisters of Whitten, McPherson v. (Ala. App.).
925 True Love, State v. (Ala.)... 830 Whittington, Davis v. Miss.). .
Wilhite, American Steel & Wire Co. v. Van Deren v. Lory (Fla.).. 794 (Ala.. App.)..
923 Van Ness v. Louisiana Farm Machinery Wilhite, Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Co. (La.)..
135 Veillard v. St. Petersburg (Fla.). 163 Wilkes, Grantham v. (Miss.).
673 Viering v. N. K. Fairbanks Co. (La.) 729 Wilkins V. Featherstone Transfer Co. Vildibill, John R. Thompson & Co. v. (Ala.) 139 (La.)
732 Village of South Highlands v Lagier (La.) 287 Wilkinson, Loveland v. (Miss.).
394 Virginia Can Co., Houston Canning Co. v. Wilkinson' v. State (Ala. App.).
104 | Wilkinson County v, Foster Creek Lumber Vizard Imp. Co., S. T. Alcus & Co. v. (La.) 395 & Mfg. Co. (Miss.).
2 Volking, F. W. Woolworth Co. v. (Miss.) 3 Wilkinson & Son, G. A. Soden & Co. v.
182 Waguespack, Shelley V. (La.). 417 Williams v. Bessemer (Ala. App.).
927 Walker v. State (Ala. App.).
564 Williams, Southern R. Co. v. (Ala.). 203 Walker v. State (Miss.). 9 Williams v. State (Ala. App.).
573 Walker Electric & Plumbing Co. v. Knight Williams v. State, two cases (Ala. App.) 927 (Ala.) 923 Williams y. State (Miss.)
195 Wall-Hay-Wall Lumber Co. v. Mathews Williams v. State (Miss.).
527 (Ala.) 824 | Williamson v. State (Miss.).
395 Walter Walton Co., East Coast Lumber Williamson v. State, two cases (Miss.) 34 Co. v. (Fla.).. 738 Williamson v. State (Miss.)
35 Walton v. Walton (La.). 786 Wilson, Eggleston v. (Ala.).
89 Walton Co., East Coast Lumber Co. v. Wilson v. State (Ala.).
917 (Fla.) 738 Wilson v. State (Ala. App.)
914 Ward v. Carley (Miss.) 286 Windham v. State (Ala. App.).
457 Ware y. Goodrich (Fla.) 748 Wise v. Cobb (Miss.):..
189 Waters-Tonge Lumber Co., Way v. (Ala.) 219 Wisner Estate v. Stark (La.)
247 Watkins Co. y. Buchanan (Miss.).
285 W. M. Turnbough & Sons, Illinois Cent. R. Watkins Co. y. Fornea (Miss.)
286 Watson, Ingram v. (Ala.)
557 Wofford Oil Co. v. Russellville (Ala. App.) 304 Watts v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (Ala.) 812 Wogan, Inc., v. Folse (La.)
540 Way v. Waters-Tonge Lumber Co. (Ala.) 219 | Woolworth Co. v. Volking (Miss.).
3 Wayne, Braselton v. (Fla.).. 272 | Wright v. Houston (Miss.).
395 W. B. Smith & Sons, Gay & Bruce v. Wright, Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. (Diss.). 1 (Ala.) 633 | Wright v. State (Ala. App.).
458 Webster, Ex parte. (Ala.)...
202 Wye Shipping Co. v. Hunter, Benn & Co. Webster, Ex parte (Ala.). 909 (Ala.)
475 Webster v. State (Ala. App.)
201 Weil v. Scarbrock (La.). 290 Yarbrough v. Hightower (Ala.)
126 Wells y. State (Miss.). 674 Young v. Clark (Miss.).
180 Werline v. State (Ala. App.) 927 Young v. Lassiter (Fla.)
362 Western Union . Tel. Co., Rawlings
Young v. State (Ala. Apr.)
200 (Miss.) 286 Young v. State (Ala. 'App.).
927 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Taylor (Fla.).. 163 Youngblood, Ex parte (Ala.).
88 West Hatchie Drainage Dist., Michael v. Youngblood' v. State (Ala. App.)
392 Wheelock v. Dillard (Ala.) 840 Zieman, Ex parte (Ala.).
563 White v. Capps (Ala. App.) 927 Zieman, Tabb v. (Ala. App.).
562 White v. Louisiana Oil Refining Co. (La.) 442) Zimmerman, Law v. (Fla.).
See End of Index for Tables of Southern Cases in State Reports
R. Wright, the sum of $2,000 as compensaILLINOIS CENT. R. CO. V, WRIGHT. tion for damage done to crops growing upon (No. 23637.)
lands adjacent to the right of way of said (Supreme Court of Mississippi, Division B. railroad company, the declaration in said April 7, 1924. Suggestion of Error
cause averring, among other things, that in Overruled May 26, 1924.)
the construction and maintenance of its rail
road embankment the defendant had disre (Syllabus by Editorial Staff)
garded the fact that this embankment ob1. Waters and water courses Om 171(1), structed the drainage of plaintiff's lands, Railroad's failure to provide passageway for and that it had for many years negligently water held not proximate cause of injury. and willfully failed to provide the neces
Where owner of land adjacent to railroad's sary culverts and other means for the water right of way permitted creek, constituting a accumulating on said lands to pass undernatural drain of his land on other side of right neath the tracks of said defendant so that of way, to become filled with logs and débris, the same might be quickly and finally disthe railroad was not liable for damage to crops on such owner's land on other side of the right posed of through the channel provided by of way, by reason of its failure to provide a
nature. The facts necessary to be stated passageway for the water across right of way, are, in substance, as follows: At the point since such failure on the part of the railroad where the damage is alleged to have occurwas not the proximate cause of the injury, in- red the railroad runs north and south across asmuch as the drainage would have been ob a valley in which there was a natural drain structed by owner's own failure to keep ditch or creek running from the east to the west. open, even if railroad had provided for ade- The railroad embankment was constructed quate drainage across its right of way.
across this valley so that it obstructed the 2. Negligence 56(1)-"Proximate cause" of natural drainage of the area to the east of injury.
the railroad, and, to meet this situation, the Nothing can be deemed the “proximate railroad company at the time of throwing up cause" of an injury, unless, had it not hap- this embankment, about the year 1860, conpebed, the injury would not have occurred. structed under the embankment a brick cul
[Ed. Note.-For other definitions, see Words vert 10 feet wide and 942 feet high. In the and Phrases, First and Second Series, Proxi- year 1911, the appellee purchased the land mate Cause.)
lying in this valley on both sides of the rail
road. The land purchased by the appellee Appeal from Circuit Court, De Soto Coun which lies on the eastern side of the railty; Greek L. Rice, Judge.
road consists of 409 acres, lying in the valAction by F. R. Wright against the Illinois ley which runs eastward from the railroad, Central Railroad Company. Judgment for and running across this land to the brick plaintiff
, and defendant appeals. Reversed culvert are two ditches, one leading from the and rendered.
northern slope of the valley, and the other
The land purMay, Sanders & McLaurin, of Jackson, for chased by the appellee on the western side appellant.
of the railroad consists of 74 acres which Wells, Stevens & Jones and Francis Har- lies in a long, narrow strip, about threemon, all of Jackson, for appellee.
fourths of a mile long, and 200 or 300 yards
wide, and from the western end of the culCOOK, J. This cause is before this court vert across this strip of land there meanders op an appeal by the Illinois Central Rail- a creek which is the natural drainage of road Company from a judgment of the cir- this part of the valley. cult court of De Soto county, based on the
On account of the gradual filling of the verdict of a jury awarding the plaintiff, F. land in this valley, as well as the creek
For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER 1o all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexos 100 SO.-1
which drains westward from the culvert, the, on the right of way. If the ditch across the bed of this creek, both on the right of way western part of the right of way should be and west thereof, is now 5 or 6 feet higher opened to the depth of the culvert, it would than the bottom of this culvert, and as a only remove the obstruction or dam to the consequence mud and water stands in the line of appellee's property and would not afculvert to the same level as the bottom of ford the desired relief. If the culvert and the ditch beyond. This leaves only about 3 or ditch on the right of way are to remain 4 feet of the top of the culvert which serves open and function properly, it is manifest as drainage, and as a result, in times of that corresponding drainage must be providrain, the water is dammed up at the easted across the lands of appellee, and, until end of the culvert, and backs up and spreads that is done, we do not think the appellant over a portion of appellee's land to the east | is required to do the useless thing of openof the railroad; thereby damaging the crop ing the ditch on the right of way to a depth growing thereon. The railroad right of way below the level of the drainage beyond. If is 100 feet wide, the culvert 60 feet long, the railroad company had provided a clear and the distance from the western mouth of passage for the water the entire width of its the culvert to the western edge of the right right of way, we think the same resultş
20 feet. The testimony is prac- would have followed on account of the obtically undisputed that the level of the bot-struction created by appellee's land west of tom of the ditch across this 20 feet from the the right of way, and, this being true, the mouth of the culvert to the western edge of failure of the railroad company to open this the right of way is 5 or 6 feet higher than ditch cannot be held to be the proximate the bottom of the culvert, while the level of cause of the injury to appellee's crops, since the bottom of the ditch west of the right of "nothing can be deemed the proximate cause way and on and across appellee's land is of an injury unless, had it not happened, the practically the same, and that this elevation injury would not have occurred." 1 Thompof the bottom of the ditch acts as a dam at son Neg. $ 56. When the appellee has re the western mouth of the culvert; thereby moved the obstructions existing on his owủ causing the culvert to fill up to the same land and provided an adequate outlet therelevel, leaving only the top portion of the on, a corresponding duty will rest upon the culvert to function.
railroad company, but the act of the comThere are many questions discussed in the pany in failing to provide a clear passage briefs of counsel which, under our view of for the water was not an act "without which this case, it will be unnecessary to consider. the damage would not have occurred," and The appellee contends that the proximate we think the peremptory instruction recause of the injury and damage was the fill- quested by the appellant company should ing of the ditch in the space intervening be- have been granted. tween the mouth of the culvert and the The judgment of the court below will western edge of the right of way, and the therefore be reversed, and judgment entered trial court instructed the jury, in effect, here for the appellant. that the railroad company was negligent in Reversed, and judgment for appellant. failing to provide passageway for the water the entire width of the right of way, even though no passage for the water existed beyond the right of way, and that it was liable for any damage resulting from its fail. WILKINSON COUNTY Y. FOSTER CREEK ure in this regard.
LUMBER & MFG. CO. (No. 24092.)* [1, 2] The flow of water across this right (Supreme Court of Mississippi, Division B. of way is from east to west, and it is undis
May 12, 1924.) puted that the drainage from the east line of the right of way to the western end of the
(Syllabus by the Court.) culvert is adequate if the flow of water was Taxation ww493(4)-When appeal from order not obstructed west of that point. While it of board equalizing assessment will lie, stated. is conceded that the ditch on the right of An appeal from the board of supervisors in way west of the culvert has filled until the assessing and equalizing taxes does not lie until level of the bottom thereof is several feet after the State Tax Commission has passed above the bottom of the culvert and that
on the roll and equalized it with those of other this obstructs the water at the mouth of the counties, under sections 6-10, c. 323, Laws
1920, Hemingway's Supplement 1921, 88 776901 culvert, yet practically the same condition
to 7769h1, and an appeal taken by a taxpayer exists in the creek west of the right of way. I prior to the filing of the assessment roll with The land west of the right of way is owned Tax Commission will be dismissed. Moller by the appellee, and the ditch which affords | Vanderboom Lumber Co. v. Attala County, 99 an outlet for this drainage across this land South. 823, cited. is filled with logs and débris, and the level of the bottom thereof is practically the same Appeal from Circuit Court, Wilkinson as that of the portion of the ditch which is County; R. L. Corban, Judge. For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered
Digests and Indexes *Suggestion of error overruled June 9, 1924.