Stephenson v. State, 30317
Citation | 244 Ind. 452,193 N.E.2d 369 |
Decision Date | 31 October 1963 |
Docket Number | No. 30317,30317 |
Parties | Russell STEPHENSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Stevens & Wampler, Plymouth, for appellant.
Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Howard R. Johnson, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant has taken this appeal from the judgment of the Marshall Circuit Court rendered on a jury's verdict awarding him the sum of $1,400.00 in a condemnation action brought by appellee, the State of Indiana.
Appellee's complaint alleged appellant was the owner of a forty acre tract of land in Marshall County, Indiana, and that 3.506 acres of such tract was sought to be taken for the improvement of U. S. Highway 31 in a bypass around Plymouth, Indiana. The report of the appraisers fixed damages in the sum of $4,224.00. Upon exceptions being taken by the State of Indiana the cause was submitted to a jury for trial resulting in the aforesaid jury's verdict for $1,400.00. Appellant assigns as error the overruling of his motion for new trial.
Appellant contends on this appeal that the court erred in giving to the jury appellee's tendered instruction number 10 which was as follows:
Appellant objected to the giving of such instruction for the reason:
In determining the amount of damages recoverable in the condemnation of a portion of a tract of land under Burns' § 3-1706 (1946 Repl.), 1 it is not proper to limit the recovery to the fair market value of the land appropriated but the damage naturally accruing to the residue of the land should also be considered. As stated in West's I.L.E., Eminent...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Anderson v. Pre-Fab Transit Co., Inc.
...stating the law but the harmful effect of such an erroneous instruction can only be removed by its withdrawal." Stephenson v. State, (1963) 244 Ind. 452, 193 N.E.2d 369, 370. See also Hainey v. Zink, (1979) Ind.App., 394 N.E.2d Appellants also objected to the reading of Court's Instruction ......
-
State v. Church of Nazarene of Logansport
...market value of the residue following the partial taking. Glendenning v. Stahley (1910), 173 Ind. 674, 91 N.E. 234; Stephenson v. State (1963) 244 Ind. 452, 193 N.E.2d 369. In order to arrive at this figure, it was necessary for Hunnings to testify to the market values of the tract and buil......
-
State v. Church of Nazarene of Logansport, 2--975A224
...market value of the residue following the partial taking. Glendenning v. Stahley (1910), 173 Ind. 674, 91 N.E. 234; Stephenson v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 452, 193 N.E.2d 369. In order to arrive at this figure, it was necessary for Hunnings to testify to the market values of the tract and bui......
-
State v. Furry, 1067
...the residue and 'other damages' issues because it violates the statutory scheme of the Eminent Domain Act, citing Stephenson v. State (1963), 244 Ind. 452, 193 N.E.2d 369. Burns' § 3--1706 sets forth the measure of damages upon 'First. The fair market value of each parcel of property sought......