Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Perry v. Grand River Dam Authority
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided December 31, 2013No. Nos. 109,714, 109,715 and 109,716Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRapp, J.
{1 While I agree that all of the Grand River Dam Authority's (GRDA) appeal must be reversed, I dissent from the resolution of these appeals by the Majority.
T2 I concur with the Majority's Decision that the fifteen-year Statute of Limitations applies to each of the individual landowner's claims for just compensation for taking of personal property. However, because there are issues about the taking and dates of taking, I would have the trial court apply the fifteen-year limitation only after the takings issues are resolved.
I. GRDA Appeals.
1 3 My point of departure from the Majority begins with…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Sunburst School District No. 2 v. Texaco, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 2007
- Gledhill v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1932
- Fowler Irrevocable Trust 1992-1 v. City of BoulderSupreme Court of Colorado · 2001
- Henthorn v. Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1969
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.