Telluride Power Co. v. Bruneau
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Third District; Hon. M. L. Ritchie, Judge. Condemnation proceeding by the Telluride Power Company aginst Moses Brtmeau. Plaintiff appeals from judgment assessing defendant’s damages. APPELLANT’S POINTS. In eminent domain proceedings, the general rule of damages obtains, which is, that damages to be recoverable must be certain and direct. Contingent, speculative and remote damages are excluded from the consideration of the jury. (Postal Tel.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Third District; Hon. M. L. Ritchie, Judge. Condemnation proceeding by the Telluride Power Company aginst Moses Brtmeau. Plaintiff appeals from judgment assessing defendant’s damages. APPELLANT’S POINTS. In eminent domain proceedings, the general rule of damages obtains, which is, that damages to be recoverable must be certain and direct. Contingent, speculative and remote damages are excluded from the consideration of the jury. (Postal Tel. Co. v. O. S. L. Co., 23 Utah, 474; 65 Pac. 735, 740; 15 Cyc. 715, 716, 717; Lewis on Eminent Domain (3d Ed.), sec. 1313.) The…
1Opinion of the CourtStraup, J.
This is an action to' condemn a strip' of land twenty feet wide over the lands of the defendant for an electric power line extending from Bingham to the Garfield smelter. The defendant owns about 280 acres inclosed by fence. His land is about five miles from Tooele City. There is evidence to show that about 175 acres is under cultivation upon which lucerne and grain have been raised. The defendant also kept and pastured on his land from 100 to 200 head of cattle each year. The land is adaptable to the raising of general farm products, fruit, potatoes, and other vegetables. The power line…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Alloway v. NashvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 1890
- Sargent v. Inhabitants of MerrimacMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Seattle & Montana Railway Co. v. GilchristWashington Supreme Court · 1892
- O'Neill v. San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake RailroadUtah Supreme Court · 1911
- Leroy & Western Railroad v. RossSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Illinois Power & Light Corp. v. TalbottIllinois Supreme Court · 1926
- Kentucky Hydro-Electric Co. v. WoodardCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- R. R. v. . Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- State Ex Rel. Engineering Commission v. PeekUtah Supreme Court · 1953
- Baucum v. Arkansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.