Reed v. Department of Highways
This text of 10 Ct. Cl. 99 (Reed v. Department of Highways) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The claimants, Mr. and Mrs. T. E. Reed, and the respondent, Department of Highways, have filed a stipulation in the case substantially as follows: That in late May or early June, 1973, the respondent’s employees sprayed a herbicide known as Dupont Hy-Var XL in the area of a highway sign near the claimants’ property in Nitro, West Virginia; that immediately after the spraying operation and as a result thereof, a healthy, 20-year old, yellow transparent apple tree, theretofore producing 20 to 25 bushels of apples each year, started to wilt and eventually died; and that the fair and reasonable value of the tree was $600.00 (the original claim was for $800.00).
It appears to the Court that this claim has been carefully investigated by the respondent and that the facts have been fairly stipulated by the parties. The Court finds that the respondent was negligent in its spraying operation, proximately causing injury to the claimants’ property, and that the respondent is liable to the claimants for damages in the amount stipulated. Accordingly, an award is made to the claimants, Mr. and Mrs. T. E. Reed, in the amount of $600.00.
Award of $600.00.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 Ct. Cl. 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-department-of-highways-wvctcl-1974.