DuPuy v. City of Waco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “an access right is an easement judicially recognized as appurtenant to tangible property to protect the benefits of private ownership”
• holding that plaintiff was deprived of reasonable access when his property was left abutting a cul-de-sac
• stating that construction of viaduct, which deprived landowner of “reasonable access,” entitled him to compensation under the constitution
• explaining the concept of article 1, section 17 of the Constitution
• “It was the injustice of requiring an actual taking which explains the inclusion for the first time in the Constitution of 1876 of the requirement that compensation be paid for the damaging of property for public use.”
• \It was the injustice of requiring an actual [physical] taking which explains the inclusion for the first time in the Constitution of 1876 of the requirement that compensation be paid for the damaging of property for public use.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).