Stuart v. Union Pacific R. Co.
227 U.S. 342 (1913)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Stuart v. Union Pacific R. Co., 227 U.S. 342 (1913)

Stuart v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

No. 136

Argued January 22, 1913

Decided February 24, 1913

227 U.S. 342

Syllabus

It ha already been decided by this Court that the Kansas Pacific Railway Company had a right to build west of the one hundredth meridian.

It has also been heretofore decided that the Pacific Railroad Acts of July 1, 1862, and July 2, 1864, should be considered and construed as one act.

A right of way is a substantial and obvious benefit, and if a railroad is entitled to a right of way under an act, it is entitled thereto under a later act extending the route and granting all benefits given under the earlier act.

Even though the record may not show that all the maps of definite location had been filed, a railroad company may acquire under the Acts of 1862 and 1864 a right of way by actual construction of the road.

A railroad obtaining a right of way under the Acts of 1862 and 1864 retains title thereto whether occupied by it or not.

All persons acquiring public lands after the passage of the Pacific Railroad Acts took the same subject to the right of way conferred by them on the proposed roads. Railroad Co. v. Baldwin,103 U. S. 426.

Where the claimants to the same land have both paid the taxes thereon continuously, they stand on equal footing, and the payment does not establish adverse possession.

Under the Acts of 1862 and 1864, the Kansas Pacific Railway Company had authority to build west of the one hundredth meridian to Denver, and was entitled to a right of way two hundred feet from the center of the track, and that right is superior to claims initiated after the Act of 1864, even if prior to the construction of the road, and this right is not defeated by adverse possession.

178 F. 753 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the title to certain portions of the right of way of the Kansas Pacific Railway now

Page 227 U. S. 343

owned by the Union Pacific Railroad, are stated in the opinion.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.