Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Dean
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1ConcurrenceJohn A. Fogleman, Justice
I concur in the result hut am compelled to dissent from a part of the court’s action. In my opinion, the majority holding that appellant’s requested Instruction No. 10 should have been given has, in effect, changed the law of eminent domain and has created a dilemma for property owners, whose rights as such have been declared higher than constitutional sanction.
This instruction would have foreclosed, as a matter of law, any consideration of the Collier tract by the jury because of a “possible taking by the Highway Commission.” [Emphasis mine] It would have also prevented the jury from…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Forster v. . ScottNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Moale v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1853
- State v. StabbIndiana Supreme Court · 1948
- Commonwealth AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Driver v. Western Union RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.