From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. Illinois Oil Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Feb 11, 1936
54 P.2d 646 (Okla. 1936)

Opinion

No. 22619.

February 11, 1936.

(Syllabus.)

Eminent Domain — Pipe Line Along and Under Highway Held not Additional Servitude Entitling Owner of Abutting Land to Compensation Therefor.

The construction and maintenance of an oil pipe line along and under a state highway, constructed and maintained in the manner authorized and provided by law, is not an additional servitude for which compensation must be paid to the owner of abutting land, or to the owner of the land over which the highway was laid.

Appeal from District Court, Payne County; Charles C. Smith, Judge.

Action by F.A. Anderson against the Illinois Oil Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Walter Mathews, for plaintiff in error.

Wilcox Swank, for defendant in error.

C.B. McCrory, T.H. Ottesen, and Dick Jones, amici curiae.


This case was tried with, and the same record made as in, F.D. Nazworthy v. Illinois Oil Company, 176 Okla. 37, 54 P.2d 642, this day decided. The same questions are involved. What was said in that case is applicable here. The same judgment was rendered below. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. C. J., and BAYLESS, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., concur. RILEY, J., dissents. BUSBY and PHELPS, JJ., absent.


Summaries of

Anderson v. Illinois Oil Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Feb 11, 1936
54 P.2d 646 (Okla. 1936)
Case details for

Anderson v. Illinois Oil Co.

Case Details

Full title:ANDERSON v. ILLINOIS OIL CO

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Feb 11, 1936

Citations

54 P.2d 646 (Okla. 1936)
54 P.2d 646

Citing Cases

Stanolind Pipe Line Co. v. Winford

WELCH, J. The facts here are similar to, but not identical with, the facts in Nazworthy v. Illinois Oil Co.,…

Mississippi Valley Gas Co. v. Boydstun

, 74 S.W. 709; Cumberland Tel. Tel. Co. v. Avritt, 85 S.W. 204; Kentucky West Va. Power Co. v. Crawford, 16…