Ralston v. City of Middlesboro
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
1Opinion of the Court
STANLEY, Commissioner.
The question is whether the City of Middlesboro may build and operate an electric plant and distribution system authorized by KRS 96.550 to 96.900, commonly called the “T.V.A. Act,” without having negotiated with the Kentucky Utilities Company for the purchase of its plant now being operated in the city. KRS 96.580 provides that before a city may enter upon the “construction of any duplicating facilities”, or condemn “an existing electric plant” it shall notify the owner of such a plant of its desire to purchase it, and, failing to reach an agreement upon the value,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- City of Middlesboro v. Kentucky Utilities Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1940
- City of Middlesboro v. Kentucky Utilities Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931
- Union Light, Heat & Power Co. v. City of Fort ThomasCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- East Tennessee Telephone Co. v. Board of CouncilmenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Mayor of Jersey City v. North Jersey Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.