Oregon v. Bailey
1957.OR.40001; 319 P.2D 906; 212 OR. 261
-
- USD 0.99
-
- USD 0.99
Descripción editorial
BRAND, Justice. This is an action brought by the State of Oregon by its Highway Commission against Kate L. Bailey, Leslie Zumwalt and Mary Eleanor Zumwalt, husband and wife, and Bernard I. Mather and Alice A. Mather, husband and wife, to condemn land required for a limited access highway. Judgment was entered on a verdict for defendants for $22,000 plus interest, and plaintiff appeals. The plaintiff Highway Commission assigns as error the order of the trial court in allowing defendants motion to strike plaintiffs further and separate reply which alleges purported special benefits to be set off against the damages arising from the condemnation and which order also excluded any evidence in support of those allegations. The contention of defendant is that that reply alleges only general and not special benefits to defendants and that general benefits cannot be set off against damages. The bill of exceptions is sufficient to raise this issue, but it does not bring up the evidence. Our question is whether evidence which would support the reply would have been admissible.