Legal Opinion
Hubenak v. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co.
Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)
Decided March 8, 2001No. 11-00-00128-CVPublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McCALL, Justice.
The only issue in this condemnation case is whether the trial court erred in finding that San Jacinto Gas Transmission Company (San Jacinto) met the jurisdictional requirement of TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 21.012 (Vernon 1984) before instituting the condemnation proceedings for two easements crossing Thelma Blahuta Hube-nak’s (the Landowner) land. We reverse and remand.
San Jacinto is a gas utility company with the power of eminent domain. TEX. UTIL. CODE ANN. § 181.00 et seq. (Vernon 1998 & Supp.2001). In 1996, San Jacinto’s board of directors authorized the construction…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
- Bland Independent School District v. BlueTexas Supreme Court · 2000
- Gibbs v. General Motors CorporationTexas Supreme Court · 1970
- Randall's Food Markets, Inc. v. JohnsonTexas Supreme Court · 1995
- Houston North Shore Railway Co. v. TyrrellTexas Supreme Court · 1936
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Malcomson Road Utility District v. Newsom, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2005
- Hubenak v. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2002
- MidTexas Pipeline Co. v. Dernehl, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2002
- ExxonMobil Pipeline Co. v. Harrison Interests, Ltd., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2002
- Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. v. Fox Television Stations, Incorporated, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2003
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.