State Highway Commissioner v. Watt
Michigan Supreme Court
1DissentKelly, J.
Three commissioners appointed by the trial court reported that appellants *301should receive $15,650 as compensation for petitioner taking appellants’ property for highway purposes.
The trial court refused to confirm the award and .appellants “urge” this Court to “find that the lower court committed error in refusing to confirm the award and that his order be reversed, with an order ■confirming the award.”
Appellants’ property, consisting of approximately 20 acres, is located south of Cadillac, Michigan, and extends 660 feet north and south and 1,320 feet east and west.
For highway purposes and in…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- State v. PetersonMontana Supreme Court · 1958
- In Re Widening of Bagley AvenueMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Pennysavers Oil Co. of Texas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1960
- Riddle v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Kansas · 1959
- Pearsall v. Board of SupervisorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Department of Transportation v. TomkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
- State Highway Commissioner v. Gulf Oil Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1966
- Biff's Grills, Inc. v. State Highway CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1977
- Houghs v. State Highway CommissionerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1965
- State Road Commission v. Utah Sugar Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.