Northern Pacific Railway v. STATE EX REL. CITY OF DULUTH

Background

A railroad company had laid tracks across what became Lake Avenue in Duluth in 1869, and the street was improved for public use in 1871. In 1891 the city and the railroad agreed that the railroad would contribute $50,000 toward a new viaduct, the city would build the bridge (spending an additional $23,000), the city would maintain the part of the bridge over the railroad for fifteen years, and the city would perpetually maintain the approaches. By 1903 the viaduct and approaches had become dangerous, and the city passed a resolution demanding the railroad immediately make specified repairs and authorized court action if the railroad refused.

Reasoning

The key question was whether the city’s demand and the court order requiring repairs unlawfully impaired the 1891 agreement. The Court reviewed whether the railroad’s charter and public-safety rules left room for the railroad to escape safety duties by contract. Citing prior decisions, the Court held that the government’s power to protect public safety (the police power) cannot be contracted away and that uncompensated obedience to reasonable safety regulations does not violate the Constitution. The Minnesota court’s conclusion that the railroad could be required to make the safety repairs and that the 1891 promise could not bar that duty was affirmed.

Real world impact

The decision means cities can force railroads to fix dangerous crossings and viaducts for public safety even if the parties previously agreed otherwise. Railroads cannot avoid reasonable safety obligations by private agreement when those obligations fall within the government’s continuing power to protect the public. The Minnesota judgment ordering repairs was therefore upheld.