Show simple item record

dc.creatorPerrin, Douglas
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-05T19:29:14Z
dc.date.available2018-12-05T19:29:14Z
dc.date.issued1976
dc.identifier.citation7 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 738en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/82318
dc.description.abstractDescribes the Texas Supreme Court case Heddin v. Delhi Gas Pipeline Co. In Heddin, Delhi Gas Pipeline Company brought a condemnation suit against Mr. and Mrs. Heddin to lay gas transmission pipeline under the Heddins’ property. The condemnor did not raise the issue of fear in the original proceeding, and thus the Court held that they were barred from introducing evidence of a rupture in another pipeline located near the Heddins’ land, which occurred after the date that the easement was granted.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTexas Tech Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectFearen_US
dc.subjectElement of damagesen_US
dc.subjectCondemnationen_US
dc.subjectEasementen_US
dc.subjectEminent domainen_US
dc.subjectHeddin v. Delhi Gas Pipeline Co.en_US
dc.subjectCase noteen_US
dc.titleEvidence of the Rupture of a Gas Pipeline Occurring After the Taking of Land Is Admissible to Prove “Fear” as an Element of Damages if the Condemnor Places the Issue of Fear into the Proceedingsen_US
dc.title.alternativeEminent Domain -- Evidence of the Rupture of a Gas Pipeline Occurring After the Taking of Land Is Admissible to Prove “Fear” as an Element of Damages if the Condemnor Places the Issue of Fear into the Proceedingsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record