State Ex Rel. Phoenix Insurance Company v. Ritchie
West Virginia Supreme Court
1DissentCalhoun, Judge
Respectfully, I dissent. I would deny the relief sought in each of these mandamus proceedings on the ground that eminent domain is not a proper procedure by which the landowners in these cases may obtain a recovery of damages from the state road commission.
In my judgment, the Court in these cases, for the first time, is requiring the state road commissioner, (or the state commissioner of highways), to institute eminent domain proceedings in order to permit recovery for damages which have not been caused purposely or designedly and which, at most therefore, were caused negligently to property…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Watts v. Norfolk & W. R.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1894
- Perdue v. SJ Groves and Sons CompanyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1968
- Varner v. MartinWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
- Buckhannon & Northern Railroad v. Great Scott Coal & Coke Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1914
- Whitney v. Ralph Myers Contracting CorporationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1961
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.