Legal Opinion
Petet v. McClanahan
Supreme Court of Missouri
Decided April 6, 1923PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRagland, J.
The County Court ¡of Buchanan County in relocating a public road took for that purpose a strip of land fifty feet in width off of one side of plaintiff’s farm. This action is to recover the value of the land taken and the consequential damages.
The county court in making the reloca,tion followed, or attempted to follow, the provisions of Section 10636, Revised Statutes 1919. The section, so far as pertinent to the questions at issue, is as follows:
“The right of eminent domain is vested in the several counties of the State to condemn private property for public road purpose. ... If the county…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Johnson v. BeazleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Lingo v. BurfordSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Brawford v. WolfeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Rottmann v. SchmuckerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Barker v. St. Louis CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1937
- Watts ex rel. Watts v. Lester E. Cox Medical CentersSupreme Court of Missouri · 2012
- Wyoming State Highway Department v. NapolitanoWyoming Supreme Court · 1978
- Hunt v. U.S. Fire Insurance Co. of N.Y.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1946
- Western Fire Ins. v. University CityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.