Anderson v. Teco Pipeline Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a corporation operating a gas pipeline has the power of eminent domain if it devotes its private property and resources to public service and allows itself to be publicly regulated
• explaining that the company’s board of directors usually makes this finding
• proof of both unanimous consent of shareholders and unanimous consent of board of directors stating that pipeline was needed to serve a public purpose, and describing route
• proof of both unanimous consent of shareholders and unanimous consent of board of directors stating that pipeline was needed to serve a public purpose, and describing route
• proof of both unanimous consent of shareholders and unanimous consent of board of directors stating that pipeline was needed to serve a public purpose, and describing route
• “When a fact issue exists regarding whether the company’s decision was made in bad faith or was arbitrary, capricious, or fraudulent, that issue may be submitted to the jury for determination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).