State Ex Rel. Dabney v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1DissentRilex, J.
I think th'e authority to proceed in the exercise of powers of eminent domain must be specifically alleged and proven. There must b'e a strict compliance with the statutory requirements in aill such special proceedings. Lacik et al. v. Colorado, T. & M. Ry. Co. et al., 25 Okla. 282, 105 Pac. 655.
It may be that the Legislature delegated the power of eminent domain to the Highway Commission as applied to state roads. With that we are not concerned in the case at bar. This action concerns a county highway, and by section 8, chapter 48, Session Laws 1924, it is expressly provided that' the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sholl v. German Coal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1887
- Tuttle v. Jefferson Power & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Washington Water Power Co. v. WatersU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Idaho · 1910
- Lacik v. Colorado, T. & M. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Jenks v. Mayor of TauntonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.