Suntide Inn Operating Corp. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma State Highway Commission
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1DissentDavison, Justice
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion of my fellow Justices. In reaching the results that it did, the majority opinion puts great emphasis upon the fact that a private citizen may not be compensated for damage to his property right of access unless there is a taking. The majority opinion also suggests that when a governmental authority regulates a private citizen’s right to access for the public’s safety and welfare, such regulation is not compensable. In discussing these concepts, the majority opinion states:
“ * * * ^ right of access belonging to the landowner whose property abuts…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Foster Lumber Co. v. Arkansas Valley & W. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- City of Shawnee v. Robbins Bros. Tire Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Oklahoma Turnpike Authority v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
- Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. PrigmoreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. JenningsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.