SANTA FE, L. v. WICHITA FALLS, N.W. R

2 Citing cases

  1. Francis v. Rogers

    2001 OK 111 (Okla. 2001)   Cited 14 times
    In Francis, the disputed property was part of a tract of land originally held by Hendricks. East and west tracts of this land were separated by a railroad.

    To constitute abandonment of railroad right of way there must not only be an actual relinquishment but an intention to abandon. Kansas, O. G.Ry. Co. v. Rogers, 1947 OK 235, ¶ 7, 191 P.2d 209; Santa Fe L. E. R. Co. v. Wichita Falls N. W. Ry. Co., 1917 OK 299, ¶ ___, 166 P. 168. The question of whether a right of way has been abandoned is largely a question of intent.

  2. Kansas, Oklahoma Gulf Ry. Co. v. Rogers

    191 P.2d 209 (Okla. 1948)   Cited 4 times

    To constitute abandonment of an easement for right-of-way purposes, there must not only be an actual relinquishment, but an intention to abandon, and this is a question of fact to be determined under all the evidence. Canadian River R. Co. v. Wichita Falls N.W. R. Co., 64 Okla. 62, 166 P. 163; Santa Fe, L. E. R. Co. v. Wichita Falls N.W. R. Co., 64 Okla. 88, 166 P. 168; Fink v. Midland Valley R. Co., 100 Okla. 23, 227 P. 146. In C., E. I. R. Co. v. Clapp, 201 Ill. 418, 66 N.E. 223, quoted in Canadian River R. Co. v. Wichita Falls N.W. R. Co., supra, the court said: