Opinion ID: 4167183
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: conclusion

Text: ¶20 The trial court followed general condemnation principles to determine the fair market value of the underground gas storage easement and the surface easement taken in this case. The court allowed both parties' experts to testify regarding their respective valuations, and the court was in the best position to evaluate the demeanor of the expert witnesses and to gauge the credibility of their testimony. We have reviewed the reports of both experts and their testimony at trial, and we conclude the trial court acted well within his discretion in allowing such evidence. ¶21 The law does not permit the court to fix speculative, boom, or fancy values on condemned property. Eichman , 1921 OK 392, ¶ 4, 202 P. at 185. Rather, the law requires a determination, based on the evidence presented, of the reasonable fair market value of the property at a price for which it could have been sold by a person desirous of selling to a person wishing to buy, with neither acting under compulsion, and both exercising intelligent judgment. Id. , ¶ 5, 202 P. at 185. After thoughtfully considering the evidence presented, the trial court found $9,000.00 to be the reasonable fair market value for the underground gas storage easement and surface easement taken on and underneath the rural Haskell County property in this case. The court's decision is entitled to the same weight and consideration that would be given to a jury's verdict, and thus, we affirm. COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS' OPINION VACATED; DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT AFFIRMED