Jacksonville, Alton & St. Louis Railroad v. Caldwell, 21 Ill. 75 (1859)

Jan. 1859 · Illinois Supreme Court
21 Ill. 75
Jacksonville, Alton and St. Louis Railroad Company, Appellant, v. John Caldwell, Appellee

Jacksonville, Alton and St. Louis Railroad Company, Appellant, v. John Caldwell, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM MORGAN.

In estimating the damages occasioned by granting a right of way across a farm, where there is a conflict of evidence as to the amount of damage sustained, the jury will be justified in giving greater weight to the testimony of farmers than to that of persons engaged in other pursuits.

This was an appeal to the Circuit Court of Morgan county from an assessment of damages for right of way across the farm of Caldwell. In the Circuit Court there was a trial by jury. Eight witnesses were examined. A part of these thought the land was more benefited than injured by the right of way granted to the road. The others, who were farmers, estimated the damages from $1,000 to $1,200. The jury rendered a verdict for Caldwell, for $800, and the plaintiff entered a motion for a new trial, which was overruled, and the company prayed this appeal. This cause was tried at October term, 1857, of the Morgan Circuit Court.

D. A. and T. W. Smith, for Appellant.

Walker, J.

We are asked to reverse this judgment because it is alleged the verdict of the jury is against the weight of *76evidence. The witnesses estimated the damages from nothing to twelve hundred dollars. Those fixing it at the ■ highest estimate were farmers, and those fixing it at the lowest amount were persons engaged in other pursuits. None of the witnesses who were farmers estimated the damage to this farm at even as low a sum as that found by the jury. There were four farmers who estimated the damage at more than the jury gave, and they stand wholly unimpeached. From their occupation they had a better opportunity of estimating the injury and inconvenience occasioned to this farm by the construction of this road, than mechanics or persons engaged in other pursuits. And in such a conflict, the jury were justified in giving the preference to their testimony, and having done so, we do not feel authorized or even inclined to find fault with the conclusion at which they have arrived. And we are therefore of the opinion that the judgment of the Circuit Court should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.