Rumsey v. the New York and New England Railroad Company

Harriet Rumsey (plaintiff) owned a waterfront property directly adjacent to a public, navigable river. Rumsey used the property as a brickyard. The New York and New England Railroad Company (railroad) (defendant) owned and operated a railroad track directly between Rumsey’s property and the river. The railroad tracks predated Rumsey’s ownership of the waterfront property. Rumsey accessed the river through a culvert under the tracks. In 1880, the railroad constructed a road-bed parallel to the existing tracks that completely blocked Rumsey’s access to the river. In 1885, the State of New York granted Rumsey rights to the submerged riverbed immediately adjacent to his property, next to the tracks. Rumsey sued the railroad for eliminating his riparian right-of-access to the river. At trial, the main focus was the calculation of damages. The trial court established that Rumsey had neither operated a brickyard on his property nor used the culvert since 1875, years before the road-bed was built. The trial court granted Rumsey damages based on the rental value Rumsey’s property would have had but for the blocked river access. The trial court refused to consider the railroad’s evidence regarding the additional cost incurred to ship goods from Rumsey’s property without direct river access. The railroad appealed, arguing that damages should be limited to those incurred after 1885, when the state granted Rumsey rights to the submerged lands adjoining the tracks.