Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Farrell v. Vermont Electric Power Co., and Vermont Transco, LLC

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided December 7, 2012No. 2011-377Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Reiber, C.J.,

¶ 17. concurring and dissenting. In 1976, VELCO acquired through the power of eminent domain a 75-foot wide easement on Thomas Farrell’s property for a 115-KV electrical transmission line pursuant to a certificate of public good for the so-called Queen City Tap Line project. The order of condemnation by the Public Service Board incorporated a finding that the property “to be condemned ... to build the Queen City Tap Line is sought and necessary in order that [VELCO] may render adequate service to the public.” As compensation for the taking, the Board awarded Farrell $38,500…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Keokuk Junction Railway Co. v. IES Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2000
  2. Howard v. United StatesIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Hudson v. City of ShawneeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1990
  4. City of Sweetwater v. McEntyreCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1950
  5. Grice v. Vermont Elec. Power Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2008

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API