Legal Opinion

City of Bristol v. Horter

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 1950No. File 9105-9106PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSickel, J.

Two actions were brought by the City of Bristol, a municipal corporation, plaintiff, for the condemnation of land. In one case Bruno Horter is defendant and in the other the defendants are Swen E. Sandstrom and Carl E. Sandstrom. The issues in both cases are the same, except as to the value of the land owned by different defendants. The actions were consolidated for trial in the circuit court and on appeal.

Plaintiff’s petition in each case alleges that the governing body of the city has by resolution declared the necessity for taking private property belonging to defendants for public use as…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Casualty Reciprocal Exchange v. SutfinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
  2. Schuler v. Board of SupervisorsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. v. MasonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Cavanagh v. ColemanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Chicago, M. & St. P. R'y. Co. v. BrinkSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. City of Sioux Falls v. KelleySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State Highway Commission v. Hayes EstateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1966
  3. State Highway Commission v. BloomSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1958
  4. State Highway Commission v. FortuneSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. CutlerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1974

19 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