Legal Opinion

State v. Delany

Texas Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 2006No. 04-0628PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Per curiam

In this inverse condemnation case, the owner of raw land recovered a judgment for 90 percent of the property’s value based on alleged impairment of access. A few months after the court of appeals affirmed, we held in County of Bexar v. Santikos that when a tract has “no businesses, homes, driveways, or other improvements of any kind,” an impairment claim cannot be sustained on the basis that “someday a developer might want to build a driveway at the single most difficult and expensive location on the entire property.” 144 S.W.3d 455, 460-61 (Tex.2004). Based on that reasoning, we reverse the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Exxon Pipeline Co. v. ZwahrTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State v. HealTexas Supreme Court · 1996
  3. DuPuy v. City of WacoTexas Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Coastal Industrial Water Authority v. Celanese Corp. of AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Archenhold Automobile Supply Co. v. City of WacoTexas Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Pr Investments and Specialty Retailers, Inc. v. the State of TexasTexas Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State v. Dawmar Partners, Ltd.Texas Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Shelton v. KalbowCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2016
  4. City of Dallas v. Zetterlund, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2008
  5. Millwee-Jackson Joint Venture v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2011

14 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