Legal Opinion

Brooksbank v. Leech

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1959PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett

The plaintiffs in error filed their suits against the Commissioner of Highways and Public Works for the State of Tennessee for the taking of, and damage to, property incident to construction of a controlled access facility, commonly called a super highway. The defendants demurred on the ground that Article 1, Section 17, of the Constitution of Tennessee, and Code Section 20-1702, T.C.A., inhibits suits of this character. The trial judge sustained the demurrers, but allowed amendments to the declaration making Roane County a party defendant. The property owners prayed an appeal to the Supreme…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
  2. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. Southern v. Beeler, Atty.-Gen.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1946
  4. State Highway Department v. Montgomery Mitchell's HeirsTennessee Supreme Court · 1919
  5. State Ex Rel. Allen v. CookTennessee Supreme Court · 1937

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Blevins v. Johnson CountyTennessee Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Cox v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Catlett v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Jones v. L & N RailroadCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1981
  5. State ex rel. Moulton v. WilliamsTennessee Supreme Court · 1961

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API