Moore v. Kansas Turnpike Authority
Supreme Court of Kansas
1DissentFatzer, J.
I do not believe the court’s holding in ¶¶ 1(c) and 2 of the syllabus and the corresponding portion of the opinion correctly decides this case. G. S. 1955 Supp. 68-2006 provides in part that when property is acquired by eminent domain that, “Any such proceedings shall be conducted, and the compensation to be paid shall be ascertained and paid, in the manner provided by the laws of the state then applicable to condemnation or the exercise of the power of eminent domain by the state highway commission . . .” G. S. 1955 Supp. 68-413 authorizes the State Highway Commission to acquire titlé by…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Kohl v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- City of St. Louis v. RossiSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- State Ex Rel. McCaskill v. HallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
- Bales v. Wichita Midland Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914
- Grand River Dam Authority v. GraySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.