Courteaus, Inc. v. State, Department of Highways Ex Rel. Spannaus

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that elimination of a property owner’s access to an existing street in order to upgrade a roadway constituted a taking
• holding property owners who were not abutting owners did not have a right to damages merely because access to a conveniently located highway may be denied and cause them to use a more circuitous route
• noting compensation need not be paid when a highway project results in a nonabutting landowner and the general public having to “use a more circuitous means of highway access”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).