Court Opinion

ID: 9618760
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 05:16:51.146171+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:31.809257
License: Public Domain

ORDER
On Petition for Rehearing

Per Curiam.

The petition for a rehearing is denied.
Appellant argues that the opinion in this case was based upon a ground not raised by the record. It is true that our decision was reached upon a ground different from that upon which the order of the lower court was based. However, this was proper under Rule 4, Section 8 of the Rules of this Court.
The basis of our decision was a ground “appearing in the record” and so recognized by appellant in its brief. At page 26 of appellant’s brief it was stated:
“The question, then, is whether the pleadings in the condemnation suit reveal that the Lexingtqn Water Power *151Company requisitioned and took a fee simple interest in the lands.”
The opinion in this case simply answered appellant’s question upon the basis of the record in the 1933 condemnation proceeding. We refused to presume that the fee was acquired when there was a to,tal and complete absence of any showing in the condemnation suit that the fee was either sought or necessary.