Court Opinion

ID: 9545942
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:22:34.847076+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:15:47.685817
License: Public Domain

Hunter, J.
(dissenting) — I agree with the majority that the phrase “a fair preponderance of the evidence” is not an appropriate or desirable phrase in an instruction in condemnation cases. From the use of the phrase in instruction No. 4,1 think the jury could have been confused in believing it could determine whether the evidence of one party preponderated over the other, in its consideration of all the evidence, and could have thereby found by the instruction that the appellants failed to establish by the preponderance of the evidence that their land had the fair market value as they contended. The prejudicial inference therefrom being that the appellants had the burden of establishing their contention of fair market value by the preponderance of the evidence.
*165The case should be reversed and remanded for a new trial giving the appellants the benefit of appropriate and desirable instructions on the issue of fair market value of their land as outlined by the majority.