City Of Durham v. Lawrence Et Ux, 766.

• Citation: 200 S.E. 880,215 N.C. 75
• Decision Date: 01 February 1939
• Docket Number: No. 766.,766.
• Parties: CITY OF DURHAM. v. LAWRENCE et ux.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina

215 N.C. 75

200 S.E. 880

CITY OF DURHAM.

v.LAWRENCE et ux.

No. 766.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Feb. 1, 1939.

Appeal from Superior Court, Durham County; H. E. Olive, Special Judge.

Condemnation proceeding by the City of Durham against M. V. Lawrence and wife. From a judgment allowing the defendant $3,000 for right of way across the defendant's land, the plaintiff appeals.

No error.

This was a proceeding instituted by the City of Durham for the purpose of condemning a permanent easement consisting of a right of way across defendants' land for a sewer outfall and pipe line. Defendants' tract of land contained 75 acres, and (according to defendants' evidence) extended to within 150 yards of the corporate limits of the city. The right of way sought to be acquired was 25 feetin width and extended a distance of 2161.7 feet across defendants' land. On the sewer line as constructed through defendants' land there were five manholes.

The petition in the condemnation proceeding was filed October 25, 1935. In due time answer was filed and appraisers appointed. Upon the coming in of the appraisers' report, exceptions were filed, and the cause transferred to the civil issue docket. It was stipulated of record that the proceedings were in all respects regular, and "that the taking of the land in controversy was necessary to public interest." In 1936 defendants had the tract of land surveyed and platted for subdivision into lots. The map and plats were submitted to and approved by the city engineer, in compliance with the requirements of the city for subdivisions within a mile of the corporate limits. The purpose of this requirement was to insure conformity with the city streets and plans.

The following issue was submitted to the jury: "What compensation are the defendants entitled to recover of the petitioner, City of Durham, on account of the condemnation of the easement and right of way over the land described in the petition for an outfall sewer line and pipe line as described in the petition?"

The jury having answered the issue $3,000, judgment was entered accordingly, and plaintiff appealed.

Claude V. Jones, of Durham, for appellant.

Fuller, Reade, Umstead & Fuller, of Durham, for appellees.

DEVIN, Justice.

The power of the City of Durham to condemn a right of way over the defendants' land, for the purpose of constructing and permanently maintaining a sewer pipe line and outfall, having been admitted, and the proceedings for the exercise of that power being in all respects regular, the only question at issue was the amount of the compensation to be awarded the defendants for the easement thus acquired by the City over and through their lands.

In due course, a jury of the County, after hearing all the evidence relating thereto, ' has determined the amount of compensation due the defendants to be three thousand dollars. The trial judge, who also heard all the evidence, has declined to set aside the verdict, either on the ground of the failure of the...