Court Opinion

ID: 9858540
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:27:14.491113+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:54:43.669680
License: Public Domain

On Petition to Rehear
Appellee, The Bristol Has Corporation, has filed a petition to rehear as result of our opinion filed 3 October 1966. In this petition it is stated:
Mr. Justice Dyer, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice and the other Associate Justices of the court, disagreed with the learned Trial Judge, and holds that the Appellant, was, and is, acting in a governmental rather than a proprietary function, apparently, on the assumption that all of the property adjacent to Meade Alley had been acquired by the Appellant and therefore it, the Appellant, was the owner in fee of the land in Meade Alley.
We do not agree with this statement. We held Appellant acted in a governmental function under authority of Knoxville Housing Authority v. City of Knoxville, 174 Tenn. 76 123 S.W.2d 1085 (1939) as shown in the *200original opinion. The ownership of the property adjacent to the public way (Meade Alley) would not be controlling.
After full consideration of the petition to rehear we are satisfied with our original opinion.
The petition to rehear is denied.
BuRetett, Chief Justice, and Chattiet and Cresoet, Justices, concur.