Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co. v. New Keystone Copper Co.
Arizona Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Gila. G. W. Shute, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Concurrence
CUNNINGHAM, J.,
Concurring Specially.—I concur in the order affirming the judgment of the lower court. My reasons for so concurring in that order, briefly stated, are because the allegations of the complaint show that the purpose for which the right of way is sought to be taken is clearly for a private use and not a public use, and therefore an act of taking for the purposes alleged would clearly be an unconstitutional exercise of the right of eminent domain. Section 17, art. 2, Constitution.
In determining the question of what is a public use, Mr. Justice Cooley (Const. Lim., p. 532) says:
“The…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Healy Lumber Co. v. MorrisWashington Supreme Court · 1903
- Matter of Mayor, Etc., of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Brown v. GeraldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905
- Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. Koochiching Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Fallsburg, &c. Co. v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Virginia · 1903
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.