City of Hattiesburg, MS in Legal Battle for Steam Locomotive

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Mon Oct 09, 2023 7:20 am

From the TV station article (such as it is):

Quote:

The judge also ruled that any future claims of ownership are barred.

Since when was he appointed Supreme Dictator, and by whom? Or is this just some mangling of some other bit of legal blather by the reporter?

I don't even have a dog in this fight, but at this point I'd up the appeals just as a giant "F*** you!" to that judge......

It also seems the other article cribbed a lot of this thread here nearly verbatim.......

Jason Moyer · **Joined:** Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:36 pm **Posts:** 11

Quote:

“The city has used time, money, labor, and resources to maintain and preserve the locomotive from weathering, secured the locomotive from unwanted visitors, promoted and presented the locomotive to the community, and preserved and restored the Locomotive for the past twenty-two years, and is the only party that has been openly exhibiting ownership of the locomotive,”

How anyone from the city of Hattiesburg could read this with a straight face is beyond me. For those not following along, this is what it looked like around the time the city supposedly started "preserving" it:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2333051

More recently it looks like this, having received one sloppy coat of black paint 7 or 8 years ago apparently constituting continued preservation and restoration:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=5980374

Chris Webster · **Joined:** Sat Aug 25, 2007 12:45 am **Posts:** 1030

Alexander D. Mitchell IV wrote:

I don't even have a dog in this fight, but at this point I'd up the appeals just as a giant "F*** you!" to that judge......

It seems that Chancery Court decisions have to be appealed directly to the state's Supreme Court, which might then assign the case to the state's Court of Appeals:
State of Mississippi Judiciary: About the Courts

p51 · **Posted:** Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:07 am

Alexander D. Mitchell IV wrote:

From the TV station article (such as it is):

Quote:

The judge also ruled that any future claims of ownership are barred.

Since when was he appointed Supreme Dictator, and by whom?

A judge does have the right to make such a ruling. Anyone familiar with the legal system can tell you that in the end there really has to be some measure of finality in such a case, otherwise all legal cases would go on forever with no result for anyone, ever.
Now, is it distasteful for this ruling? Oh yeah, you betcha. Can it be appealed? Yep, to a higher court or one determined to be in a better jurisdiction over the matter.

wilkinsd · **Posted:** Wed Oct 11, 2023 3:57 pm

Eric S Strohmeyer wrote:

I figured I would share a link to these news articles regarding the fate of the locomotive. As expected, the Judge in the matter ruled in favor of the City. I'm curious to know what, if any, action the Valley RR might take to recoup its investment in the locomotive?

I suspect VRR has a cause of action against the alleged seller of the locomotive for selling something they technically do not own. Also, whomever advised the alleged seller in claiming that the seller had legal title to it probably is liable to the seller. Someone on the seller's side did not do due diligence, or so it seems.

Daylight25 · **Joined:** Wed Mar 23, 2022 11:00 pm **Posts:** 182

If Hattiesburg wanted the locomotive, they should've bought it from the Oregon Coast Scenic before the Valley Railroad contacted them to purchase it. B&HS 300 is technically still owned by them, given the sale of Kepner's collection to the OCSR

City of Hattiesburg, MS in Legal Battle for Steam Locomotive

Who is online