Court Opinion

ID: 9550555
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 18:37:05.281567+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:21:46.043384
License: Public Domain

HENRIOD, Justice
(concurring).
I am convinced I was wrong in our previous decision. I believe the trial court should be affirmed for the very simple reason that to condemn a strip for a canal is no different than to condemn it for a railroad. Neither would affect water,— underground, in a river or at a remote dam. Any discussion of water or water rights, therefore, seems foreign to this case. Hence, sufficient to the day thereof should be urged the question of damages for water loss through act or installation other than that arising out of the condemned canal. I agree generally with most of the observations of the main opinion here and of the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice WORTHEN in our other decision