Batterman v. Cleveland (City)

Citations

• 33 Ohio C.C. Dec. 149
• 18 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 446
• 1911 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 269

Syllabus

<p>EMINENT DOMAIN — LANDLORD AND TENANT</p> <p>1. Separate Findings Required for Landlord and Tenant in Condemnation Proceedings.</p> <p>In an appropriation proceeding brought by a municipal corporation against a landlord and his tenant, each is entitled to a separate finding and a separate review of that finding.</p> <p>2. Map Evidence of Possible Special Benefits to Balance of Property not Condemned.</p> <p>A map which shows that by reason of the contemplated improvement new lines of travel past a store will be opened up, which may offset some loss of trade from the old travel, is sufficient evidence to warrant a charge that the measure of damages to property not taken may be reduced by special benefits, if any, which may be found to accrue from the improvement.</p> <p>3. Value of Tenant’s Buildings on Property not Taken Admissible.</p> <p>In an appropriation of a tenant’s interest in lands, value of the buildings on the part not taken may be given in evidence, though the tenant has a right to remove them at the termination of the lease.</p>