Court Opinion

ID: 9654563
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 18:26:02.772726+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:10.628457
License: Public Domain

GREENHILL, Justice
(dissenting).
The Court has a very able opinion in the companion case hereto, DuPuy v. City of Waco. The reasons expressed in it are, in my opinion, a just basis for a recovery by Archenhold.
At the conclusion of its opinion in this case, the Court recognizes that Archenhold had been damaged and that “indeed [it has suffered] special damage not suffered in common with the general public.”
Beyond question the property rights of Archenhold were substantially damaged for the public use. Our Texas Constitution says that no person’s property shall be taken or damaged for public use without adequate compensation being made. Article I, Sec. 17.
It follows, at least to me, that Archenhold is entitled to compensation for the damage it has suffered for the public use.
SMITH and WALKER, JJ., join in this dissent.