Legal Opinion
City of Winston-Salem v. Tickle
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided September 1, 1981No. 8121SC55PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Judge.
The issue in this case is which of the two measures of damages allowed in G.S. 136-112 should be applied in fixing compensation for the taking of Parcel A. The statute provides:
“The following shall be the measure of damages to be followed by the commissioners, jury or judge who determines the issue of damages:(1) Where only a part of a tract is taken, the measure of damages for said taking shall be the difference between the fair market value of the entire tract immediately prior to said taking and the fair market value of the remainder immediately after said taking, with…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Barnes v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. MossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Board of Transportation v. MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Peck v. Superior Short Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Welch v. Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Department of Transp., Div. of Admin. v. JirikSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
- City of Winston-Salem v. YarbroughCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
- State Ex Rel. State Highway Department v. StrosniderNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1987
- City of Winston-Salem v. SlateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- State v. SeraphemCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.