Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

City of Pocatello v. Anderton

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided March 29, 1984No. 14531Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBistline, Justice

I am able to embrace some but not all of the views set forth in the Court’s opinion. Mainly, I believe that a constitutional right is being denigrated.

I. Jury Trial

Rueth v. State, 100 Idaho 203, 596 P.2d 75 (1978), Mitchell v. Flandro, 95 Idaho 228, 506 P.2d 455 (1972), before it, and the entire history of eminent domain cases make it abundantly clear that an eminent domain proceeding is a constitutional ac*375tion, and not one created by the legislature, or by the courts. So postured it is beyond the power of the courts or of the legislature to deprive a property owner of his property without…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State v. LaMereIdaho Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Roth v. HyerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1944
  3. Stephens v. KastenIllinois Supreme Court · 1943
  4. R. E. W. Construction Co. v. District Court of the Third Judicial DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1965
  5. State v. YoderIdaho Supreme Court · 1975

9 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