sounder and better doctrine in Alabama

1971In the older case of Cram v. City of Laconia, 71 N.H. 41 , 51 A. 635 , it was said: “ * * * The doctrine that the abutter is entitled to damages arising from discontinuance of any part of the street, interfering in any degree with any means of access to his property, with no limit but the rule of remoteness, and this although the street in front of the abutter remains undisturbed, and he still has communication therefrom with the general system of streets, strikes us as unsound in principle, difficult of application, and opposed to the great weight of authority. * * * The sounder and better do

1971In the older case of Cram v. City of Laconia, 71 N.H. 41 , 51 A. 635 , it was said: “ * * * The doctrine that the abutter is entitled to damages arising from discontinuance of any part of the street, interfering in any degree with any means of access to his property, with no limit but the rule of remoteness, and this although the street in front of the abutter remains undisturbed, and he still has communication therefrom with the general system of streets, strikes us as unsound in principle, difficult of application, and opposed to the great weight of authority. * * * The sounder and better do

1971State Highway Commission v. Silva, 71 N.M. 350 ; 378 P.2d 595 , the court said: “We think the better rule, and the weight’ of the more recent decisions, is that one whose property abuts upon a road or highway, a part of which is closed or vacated, has no special damage if his lands do not abut upon the closed portion thereof, if there remains a reasonable access to the main highway system.

1971State Highway Commission v. Silva, 71 N.M. 350 ; 378 P.2d 595 , the court said: “We think the better rule, and the weight’ of the more recent decisions, is that one whose property abuts upon a road or highway, a part of which is closed or vacated, has no special damage if his lands do not abut upon the closed portion thereof, if there remains a reasonable access to the main highway system.

1971In the older case of Cram v. City of Laconia, 71 N.H. 41 , 51 A. 635 , it was said: “ * * * The doctrine that the abutter is entitled to damages arising from discontinuance of any part of the street, interfering in any degree with any means of access to his property, with no limit but the rule of remoteness, and this although the street in front of the abutter remains undisturbed, and he still has communication therefrom with the general system of streets, strikes us as unsound in principle, difficult of application, and opposed to the great weight of authority. * * * The sounder and better do

1939It has been observed: “ ‘The sounder and better doctrine’ is, as laid down by Chancellor Kent, ‘that where the members of a corporation are directed to be annually elected, the words are only directory, and do not take away the power incident to the corporation to elect afterwards, when the annual day has, by some means, free from design or fraud, been passed by.’ 2 Kent’s Com. 295.” People ex rel. v. Town of Fairbury, 51 Ill. 149, 152 .

1898We have reached the conclusion, that the courts can make no exception, based on sound and just principles which would exclude railroad companies from the operation of the general rule, that in actions of ejectment at law the legal title must prevail.” — Hawkins v. Ross, 100 Ala. 459 ; Walker v. Murphy, 34 Ala. 591 ; Nelson v. Kelly, 91 Ala. 569 ; McCarty v. Woodstock Iron Co., 92 Ala. 468 ; Morgan v. Carey, 73 Ala. 222 ; McPherson v. Walters, 16 Ala. 714 .

1898We have reached the conclusion, that the courts can make no exception, based on sound and just principles which would exclude railroad companies from the operation of the general rule, that in actions of ejectment at law the legal title must prevail.” — Hawkins v. Ross, 100 Ala. 459 ; Walker v. Murphy, 34 Ala. 591 ; Nelson v. Kelly, 91 Ala. 569 ; McCarty v. Woodstock Iron Co., 92 Ala. 468 ; Morgan v. Carey, 73 Ala. 222 ; McPherson v. Walters, 16 Ala. 714 .

1898We have reached the conclusion, that the courts can make no exception, based on sound and just principles which would exclude railroad companies from the operation of the general rule, that in actions of ejectment at law the legal title must prevail.” — Hawkins v. Ross, 100 Ala. 459 ; Walker v. Murphy, 34 Ala. 591 ; Nelson v. Kelly, 91 Ala. 569 ; McCarty v. Woodstock Iron Co., 92 Ala. 468 ; Morgan v. Carey, 73 Ala. 222 ; McPherson v. Walters, 16 Ala. 714 .

1898We have reached the conclusion, that the courts can make no exception, based on sound and just principles which would exclude railroad companies from the operation of the general rule, that in actions of ejectment at law the legal title must prevail.” — Hawkins v. Ross, 100 Ala. 459 ; Walker v. Murphy, 34 Ala. 591 ; Nelson v. Kelly, 91 Ala. 569 ; McCarty v. Woodstock Iron Co., 92 Ala. 468 ; Morgan v. Carey, 73 Ala. 222 ; McPherson v. Walters, 16 Ala. 714 .

1898We have reached the conclusion, that the courts can make no exception, based on sound and just principles which would exclude railroad companies from the operation of the general rule, that in actions of ejectment at law the legal title must prevail.” — Hawkins v. Ross, 100 Ala. 459 ; Walker v. Murphy, 34 Ala. 591 ; Nelson v. Kelly, 91 Ala. 569 ; McCarty v. Woodstock Iron Co., 92 Ala. 468 ; Morgan v. Carey, 73 Ala. 222 ; McPherson v. Walters, 16 Ala. 714 .

1883In the case of The City Council of Montgomery v. Wright, 72 Ala. 411 , we stated the sounder and better rule in our opinion to be, that “the question of negligence is always deemed one of fact for the determination of the jury, in all cases of doubt, either where the facts are disputed, or where different minds may reasonably draw different inferences or conclusions.

1882This, we think, is the sounder and better rule on the subject. —Railroad v. Stout, 17 Wall. 657 ; 2 Dill.

1882It is true that there are some forcible reasons in favor of the principle as it is there stated, which have induced its adoption by the highest courts of some of our sister States. —Robinson v. Stewart, 10 N. Y. 189 ; Simpson v. Simpson, 7 Hump.