Legal Opinion
City of Phoenix v. Consolidated Water Company
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided June 22, 1966No. 8640PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STRUCKMEYER, Chief Justice.
This is an action by the City of Phoenix, a municipal corporation, against Spencer D. Stewart and Mary Jane Stewart, his wife, doing business as Consolidated Water Company, hereinafter called Consolidated. The City seeks to acquire by eminent domain a water works system owned and operated by Consolidated as a public utility. After trial to the court the value of Consolidated was found to be $3,400,000 and judgment was entered for that sum less $2,450,000 previously paid when the City took possession of the property under A.R.S. § 12-1116 (amended by Laws of 1964,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Monongahela Navigation Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Hurwitz v. HurwitzCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
- In Re Acquiring Title by City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Kennebec Water District v. City of WatervilleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1902
- Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1956
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
- Spencer D. Stewart, Et Ux. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- State v. WilsonArizona Supreme Court · 1968
- In re the Valuation Proceedings under Sections 303(c) & 306Special Court under the Regional Rail Reorganization Act · 1977
- State Ex Rel. Herman v. SchafferArizona Supreme Court · 1970
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.