Shake v. Frazier
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 20 — APPEAL TO CIRCUIT COURT — The Legislature has no power to authorize the private property of one person to be taken for the use of another private person with or without compensation. (Robinson v. Swope, 12 Bush, 21; Mills on Eminent Domain, sec. 22; Cooley on Const.
Read the full summary
Case 20 — APPEAL TO CIRCUIT COURT — The Legislature has no power to authorize the private property of one person to be taken for the use of another private person with or without compensation. (Robinson v. Swope, 12 Bush, 21; Mills on Eminent Domain, sec. 22; Cooley on Const. Limit., sec. 531.) A land-owner has the right to an outlet from his land, although he may not reside upon it; and the Legislature may, in the exercise of eminent domain, authorize the establishment of a passway over the land of another in order to provide such an outlet. (Robinson v. Swope, 12 Bush, 21.)
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PRYOR
delivered the opinion op the court.
The property of the citizen may be taken by the .sovereign power for a public use upon compensation being first made, and this is called eminent domain; but the taking of the private property of one for the private use of another, however necessary it may be for the use and enjoyment of the person to whom the right of property is transferred, has invariably .been held unconstitutional. Statutes authorizing the ■ creation of private passways over one’s land for the benefit of another have been sustained, for the reason the public is directly…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Robinson v. SwopeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1876
3Cited by10 opinions
- Chesapeake Stone Co. v. MorelandCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1907
- Anderson v. Smith-Powers Logging Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1914
- Arcola Sugar Mills Co. v. Houston Lighting & Power Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1941
- Eisenbarth v. DelpIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
- Damron v. DamronCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1905
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.