Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

New Mexico v. United States Trust Co.

N.M. v. United States Tr. Co., 172 U.S. 171 (1898)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1898-12-05
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • holding that the railroad’s rightof-way is “more than an ordinary easement” because it has the “attributes of the fee, perpetuity and exclusive use and possession”
  • discussing these two definitions and explaining that the "intention of the legislature" controls
  • “surely more than an ordinary easement was granted, — one having the attributes of the fee, perpetuity and exclusive use and possession”
  • “the right acquired by the railroad company, though technically an easement, yet requires for its enjoyment a use of the land permanent in its nature and practically exclusive.”
  • "The right acquired by the railroad company, though technically an easement, yet requires for its enjoyment a use of the land permanent in in its nature and practically exclusive."
  • issue was whether railroad's "station buildings, workshops, etc." located within 100 feet of each side of railroad were included in railroad's right of way or sufficiently attached to right of way such that it was exempt from taxation
  • describing the disruption of railroad operations on a grantor’s property
  • describing disruption to grantor’s property by railroad operations

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed New Mexico v. United States Trust Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
107 opinions

Headnotes

  1. Tax Law — Railroad Right of Way — Statutory Exemption A statutory exemption from taxation of a railroad's right of way within the Territories operates to exempt from such taxation the land itself to the extent it is made subject to the right of way, together with all structures erected thereon. 172 U.S. at 181
  2. Statutory Interpretation — Construction — Meaning of "Right of Way" The phrase "right of way," though presumptively used in its technical sense, yields to an opposing context and the intention of the legislature otherwise indicated; where the statute measures the grant as a physical thing — a strip of fixed width, broadened to include grounds for indispensable superstructures — the phrase is not limited to a mere intangible right of passage. 172 U.S. at 181-182
  3. Real Property Law — Railroad Right of Way — Nature of Interest A railroad right of way granted by Congress may signify either the mere intangible right to cross or the strip of land itself upon which the roadbed is built, and whether the grant conveys an easement or the land depends upon the nature and use of the thing granted. 172 U.S. at 182
  4. Real Property Law — Railroad Right of Way — Easement versus Fee Where the use of land is perpetual and continuous rather than intermittent and occasional, and embraces the entire beneficial occupation and improvement of the land, the grant requires more than an ordinary right of passage and may carry the fee; at minimum it confers an interest having the attributes of the fee — perpetuity, exclusive use and possession, and corporeal rather than incorporeal character. 172 U.S. at 183
  5. Real Property Law — Fixtures — Structures Attached to Right of Way The interest granted to a railroad in its right of way is real estate of corporeal quality, and under the elemental principle that whatever is erected upon land becomes part of it, rails, tracks, and structures affixed to the right of way are incidents to the right of way and share its legal character. 172 U.S. at 184
  6. Statutory Interpretation — Construction — Consistency with Prior Precedent A decision resting on the terms of a particular statute does not question the rule of construction requiring that exemptions from taxation be strictly construed, so long as the exemption is found in the plain terms of the enactment. 172 U.S. at 185