Court Opinion

ID: 9832398
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:52:54.752457+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:46.395940
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We have concluded that we were in error in holding that appellees were not entitled 'to prove the cost of removing their improvements across the road as an item that the jury might consider in arriving at the damages to the lands of appellees not taken. The. cases cited by appellee in his motion for rehearing are clearly in point on this issue. . The other testimony discussed in our original opinion was, however, in our opinion, clearly erroneous, violative of elementary rules of evidence, and such as to require a reversal of the case. To this extent appellees’ motion is granted; in all other respects it is overruled.
Granted in part, and in part overruled.