Cameron Cty. v. J.E. Wuersten

Court of Appeals of Texas

Cameron Cty. v. J.E. Wuersten

272 S.W. 1118, 1925 Tex. App. LEXIS 440

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 10, 1925

DocketNo. 7382.

StatusPublished

This text of 272 S.W. 1118 (Cameron Cty. v. J.E. Wuersten) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cameron Cty. v. J.E. Wuersten, 272 S.W. 1118, 1925 Tex. App. LEXIS 440 (Tex. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

ELY, C. J.

The commissioners’ court of Cameron county, after fully complying with all the requirements of the law'as to condemnation of land for a public road, ordered that the road described by metes and bounds be established, and that the value of the land taken from defendant in error by the court be deposited with the county treasurer to the credit of defendant in error, and it was ordered that a second-class road be opened and worked. From that order an appeal to the county court was prosecuted. Upon the verdict of a jury, judgment was rendered in the county court, that defendant in error recover from plaintiff in error $168. The jury found in answer to special issues that 5%oo of an acre of land belonging to defendant in error was appropriated by plaintiff in error and that it was of the value of $168. There was no testimony to show that a road had been established along the drainage ditch on the land now owned by plaintiff in error. It was proved that a road ran-along and on the land, but showed no right in plaintiff in error to its use. The evidence was ample to sustain the verdict of the jury. The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ELY, C. J.

The commissioners’ court of Cameron county, after fully complying with all the requirements of the law'as to condemnation of land for a public road, ordered that the road described by metes and bounds be established, and that the value of the land taken from defendant in error by the court be deposited with the county treasurer to the credit of defendant in error, and it was ordered that a second-class road be opened and worked. From that order an appeal to the county court was prosecuted. Upon the verdict of a jury, judgment was rendered in the county court, that defendant in error recover from plaintiff in error $168. The jury found in answer to special issues that 5%oo of an acre of land belonging to defendant in error was appropriated by plaintiff in error and that it was of the value of $168. There was no testimony to show that a road had been established along the drainage ditch on the land now owned by plaintiff in error. It was proved that a road ran-along and on the land, but showed no right in plaintiff in error to its use. The evidence was ample to sustain the verdict of the jury. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 S.W. 1118, 1925 Tex. App. LEXIS 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cameron-cty-v-je-wuersten-texapp-1925.