Tennessee Gas Transmission Co. v. Wood, 13558
| Decision Date | 03 February 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 13558,13558 |
| Citation | 331 S.W.2d 808 |
| Parties | TENNESSEE GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, Appellant, v. James Lawrence WOOD et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Stofer, Houchins, Anderson & Smith, Victoria, Baker, Botts, Andrews & Shepherd, Houston, for appellant.
Bond Davis, Boyle, Wheeler, Gresham, Davis & Gregory, San Antonio, for appellees.
Tennessee Gas Transmission Company instituted this proceeding by filing with the County Judge of Refugio County, Texas, its petition for condemnation of a natural gas pipe line right-of-way across two tracts of land in that county, one tract, containing 137.92 acres, belonging to James Lawrence Wood and wife, Lenora Wood, and the other tract, containing about 6,600 acres, belonging to James Lawrence Wood as life tenant and to several other persons as remaindermen. Commissioners were appointed and an award made, from which the landowners appealed to the County Court of Refugio County. Based upon the verdict of the jury, judgment was rendered in the County Court decreeing a recovery in favor of James Lawrence Wood and wife, Lenora Wood, in the sum of $345.96, with reference to the 137.92-acre tract, and a recovery in favor of James Lawrence Wood and the remaindermen in the sum of $6,938.75, with reference to the 6,600-acre tract, from which judgment Tennessee Gas Transmission Company has prosecuted this appeal.
Appellant contends that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of James Lawrence Wood, Durward Boenig, and C. H. French, as to the 'value of the lands before and after the taking of the easement' by appellant, and in overruling appellant's objection to such testimony; the objection being that the witnesses were not properly qualified as experts, and that the testimony did not relate to the proper measure of damages.
Appellant does not complain as to the sums awarded to appellees for the land taken by the fifty-foot pipe line right-of-way, but does complain of the amount allowed as damages to the land remaining after the taking of the easement.
The witness James Lawrence Wood, over appellant's objection as above stated, was permitted to testify that he had an opinion as to the 'value' of the Lambert Ranch (appellees' land was known as the Lambert Ranch), that he was familiar with the traditional way of valuing land, and that he was familiar with the easement involved. He further testified that he was familiar with land values in Refugio County, and was familiar with the value of lands in the neighborhood of the Lambert Ranch. He gave as his opinion,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stickell v. City of Baltimore
...lack of understanding is another factor weighing against his preliminary qualification to testify. Thus, in Tennessee Gas Transmission Co. v. Wood, 331 S.W.2d 808 (Tex.Civ.App.1960), it was considered to be reversible error to allow expert witnesses to testify as to the value of land 'witho......
-
Urban Renewal Agency of City of Lubbock v. Trammel, 7565
...the testimony was not sufficient to show the proper measure of value and should have been stricken. Tennessee Gas Transmission Company v. Wood, Tex.Civ.App., 331 S.W.2d 808 (N.W.H.); State v. Sides, Tex.Civ.App., 348 S.W.2d 446 (writ ref., N.R.E.); City of Houston v. Fisher, Tex.Civ.App., 3......
-
City of Amarillo v. Betts
...that he was testifying concerning the market value of the property and that he was qualified to give such opinion. Tennessee Gas Transmission Company v. Wood, 331 S.W.2d 808 (Tex.Civ.App., 1960, San Antonio, n.w.h.); Urban Renewal Agency of City of Lubbock v. Trammel, 399 S.W.2d 852 (Tex.Ci......
-
State v. Booth
...$150.00 valuation by any testimony as to 'market value'. Clearly, there is no probative value to this testimony. Tennessee Gas Transmission Company v. Wood, 331 S.W.2d 808, 810 (Tex.Civ.App., 1960; '* * * We cannot presume that when these witnesses were talking about the 'value' of the land......