Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Stinson v. Arkla Energy Resources

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 28, 1992No. 6-91-018-CVPublished

1ConcurrenceCornelius, Chief Justice

I write separately to express my conclusion that it was error to exclude evidence of other pipeline explosions. Because, however, I find the error to be harmless, I concur in the judgment.

Public knowledge and fear of pipeline explosions is a proper element of damages in a condemnation suit because that fear adversely affects the market value of the land. Public records of pipeline accidents are relevant to show public knowledge. Proof of such fear is proper if it is shown that (1) there is a basis in reason or experience for the fear, (2) the fear enters into the calculations of persons who…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Heddin v. Delhi Gas Pipeline CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Delhi Gas Pipeline Corp. v. GibbsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API