Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Slade, 41933
| Decision Date | 02 October 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 41933,41933 |
| Citation | 133 So.2d 282,241 Miss. 721 |
| Parties | MISSISSIPPI STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. Manuel SLADE et ux. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Jesse W. Shanks, Purvis, for appellant.
William E. Andrews, Jr., Purvis, Edward J. Currie, Sr. & Jr., Hattiesburg, for appellee.
This is an eminent domain proceeding wherein the Mississippi State Highway Commission is the petitioner and appellant and Manuel Slade and his wife are the defendants and appellees.
This case originated in an eminent domain court of Lamar County, Miss. A verdict and judgment were therein rendered of $8,000 to the appellees. The case was tried de novo in the Circuit Court of Lamar County, and a verdict and judgment were rendered in favor of the appellees in the sum of $12,000. From that, the Mississippi State Highway Commission has prosecuted an appeal to this Court.
The Commission ordered the construction of a new interstate highway, No. 59, which when constructed will be a four-lane interstate highway with access to the highway being limited to certain designated interchange points.
The appellees are the owners of a 20 acre tract of land, with approximately 15 acres devoted to truck land, and the balance of which is woodland and residential property. The land is located some 5 or 6 miles south of the Town of Purvis in Lamar County, Mississippi, on or adjacent to 'Old Highway No. 11' or 'Old Jackson Highway', and lies almost half way between the Towns of Purvis and Lumberton. Improvements on said tract of land consist of a seven room farm house with bath, a tool house, a small chicken house, a potato house and a barn. All of said land is under fence except approximately 1 1/2 acres which lies east of 'Old Highway No. 11'. The Highway Commission has condemned and acquired 5.36 acres from the entire tract of land owned by the appellees, leaving 2.02 acres west of the proposed Interstate Highway No. 59 and approximately 12.62 acres east of the proposed Interstate Highway No. 59. The improvements above mentioned are not taken and will be on the east portion of the land comprising 12.62 acres. The appellees will have no access to the new highway except from interchanges some 5 or 6 miles from the property here in question. After the highway is constructed the appellees will have the same access to their property lying east of the new highway, but access to the west 2.02 acres can only be had by using one of the two interchanges 5 or 6 miles from the Slade property. From all intents and purposes that tract of 2.02 acres lying west of the new highway will have very little market value after the taking. This truck farm consisting of 15 acres was highly improved land.
The main point in question before the Court is that the verdict of the jury is excessive and is not based on credible evidence, and the verdict is shocking to the enlightened conscience and was the product of bias and prejudice or sympathy.
Three witnesses testified on behalf of the Commission and three on behalf of the appellees. Two of the Commission's witnesses were men of experience and duly licensed real estate agents. Witness J. W. Morgan, an appraiser for the Highway Commission, was a graduate of Mississippi State University in agriculture and education and had taught agriculture in high school and instructed veterans for 5 years on farm training. He had been on the Slade property five or six times in preparing an appraisal of the property for the Highway Commission.
One of the witnesses for the appellees, Ben Courtney, was a licensed real estate dealer but had not dealt in real estate for several years. E. O. Hart, Sr., another witness, was a licensed real estate dealer, and Mr. Slade testified in his own behalf as to the value of the property. A summary of testimony as to the before and after taking fair market value of the property with resulting damages is as follows:
Appellant's Witnesses Fair Market Value Fair Market Value Damages
Before Taking After Taking
--------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ----------
J. Ed Turner $13,200.00 $ 7,100.00 $ 6,100.00
J. W. Morgan 13,500.00 7,990.00 5,510.00
B. J. Beard 14,080.00 8,314.00 5,766.00
Appellees' Witnesses
---------------------
Ben Courtney 27,235.00 15,235.00 12,000.00
O. E. Hart, Sr. 26,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00
Manuel Slade 25,000.00 12,500.00 12,500.00
It will be seen that the appellant's witnesses estimated the damages about $6,000 each. Appellees' witnesses estimated the damages about $12,500. Neither of the appellees' witnesses could give any comparable sales of reasonably comparable property in the area to support their appraisal, yet they appraised the damages at twice the amount given by the appellant's witnesses. All the jury could go by was the estimated values of the property before the taking and after the taking based on their opinions as to the value. It was held in Mississippi State Highway Comm. v. Valentine, 239 Miss. 890, 124 So.2d 690, 692, as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pearl River Val. Water Supply Dist. v. Brown, 43854
...in Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Herring, 241 Miss. 729, 133 So.2d 279, 895 (1961), and Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Slade, 241 Miss. 721, 133 So.2d 282, 896 (1961), the appellant, Mississippi State Highway Commission, was required to pay the costs on appeal where the j......
-
Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Davis
...Comm., 239 Miss. 518, 124 So.2d 284; Miss. State Highway Comm. v. Taylor, 237 Miss. 847, 116 So.2d 757, 759; Miss. State Highway Comm. v. Slade, 241 Miss. 721, 133 So.2d 282, 896. After careful consideration of this record, we hold that the verdict of $20,000 is so grossly excessive as to e......
-
New Orleans & Northeastern R. Co. v. Fleming, 43169
...Miss. 1, 124 So.2d 684; Strickland v. Miss. Highway Commission, 240 Miss. 7, 123 So.2d 238, 124 So.2d 696; Miss. Highway Commission v. Slade, et ux, 241 Miss. 721, 133 So.2d 282, 896; Miss. Highway Commission v. Herring, et ux, 241 Miss. 729, 133 So.2d 279, 895; Miss. Highway Commission v. ......
-
Mississippi State Highway Commission v. Jacobs
...annum from the date of the original eminent domain judgment, but damage thereon is not allowable. See also Miss. State Highway Commission v. Slade, 241 Miss. 721, 133 So.2d 282, 896. On the present appeal, no final judgment has been entered. The cause was reversed and remanded for a new tri......