Lawlor v. Southern Pacific Co.

LENNON, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered in favor of plaintiffs for three thousand dollars.

Plaintiffs are, and were during May, 1915, and for a number of years prior thereto had been, the owners of the lot of land described in the complaint. It has no frontage on any public highway. The only means of ingress and exit to or from the property is over a right of way. This right of way is situate on the westerly side of the land of defendant which lies immediately to the east of the land of plaintiffs. The right of way is about twenty-one feet wide and extends all along the westerly line of defendant’s land, which is two hundred and sixty-eight feet long. The fee of the land subject to the easement of the right of way was and is in the defendant. Immediately east of the land of plaintiff lies the railroad of defendant, situated on land owned by the defendant. On May, 1915, defendant laid a spur-track from said railroad along the right of way of plaintiffs. Said spur-track was wholly on the lands of defendant. The plaintiffs complained that their right of way had been seriously impaired by reason of the construction and operation of the spur-track, and that their adjoining property had been damaged by such impairment of the right of way.

We will not attempt to answer all the arguments in appellant’s brief which are directed against numerous supposititious theories which it suggests of plaintiff’s case. The law is settled that damages may be recovered for an interference

[99]

with an easement of right of way whereby property of plaintiff has been depreciated in value.

(Reardon

v.

San Francisco,

66 Cal 492, [56 Am. Rep. 109, 6 Pac. 317];

Eachus

v.

Los Angeles etc. Ry. Co.,

103 Cal. 614, [42 Am. St. Rep. 149, 37 Pac. 750].)

There is ample evidence in the record to sustain a finding of such interference by the jury.