State v. Spears
The STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. E. M. SPEARS Et Ux., Appellees
Opinion
STEPHENSON, Justice.
This is an eminent domain case brought by the State of Texas to acquire a strip of land for highway right-of-way purposes. This was a partial taking case and the only-points involved aré in connection with the-value of the remainder after the taking.. The State contends this finding of the jury is supported by no evidence and that such-finding is against the overwhelming weight and preponderance of the evidence.
The jury found, the market value of the-remainder, after taking, to be $8,905.00. Four expert witnesses testified, and placed' this value at $10,781.00, $11,735.00, $10,-387.00 and $9,550.00.
The jury was not authorized to fix a value on the property in question, after the taking, at a less sum than that given-by any witness. Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Lynch, Tex.Civ.App., 185 S.W. 362 ; Roberts v. State, Tex.Civ.App., 350 S.W.2d 388 .
The award found by the jury was-.excessive by the sum of $645.00. We conclude, therefore, that the appellees should be allowed to take the lesser sum if they so desire; and, if appellees shall file in> this court within 15 days their remittitur of $645.00, being the difference between the-$8,905.00 found by the jury to be the value of the remainder, after taking, and $9,550.-00 being the least value testified to by the-witnesses, as to such value. Such remit-titur must also include all interest which has accrued on such $645.00. Failing this remittitur, the trial court judgment will be reversed and remanded. Rule 440, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Lynch, Tex.Com.App., 221 S.W. 959 ; Hopson v. Gulf Oil Corp., Tex.Civ.App., 237 S.W.2d 323 .
The judgment is affirmed conditionally.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.