Smith v. Board of Sup'rs

Citations

• 124 Miss. 36
• 86 So. 707

Syllabus

<p>1. Eminent Domain. Property owner's evidence that he bought land on which highway laid out with understanding that county did not have right of way held admissible.</p> <p>Where a county undertakes to lay out a public highway and contends it has a deed to a right of way from a former owner of the land, and where such deed is not of record and there is nothing on the minutes of the board of supervisors to show it had acquired the right of way over such land, it is error to refuse to allow the owner to testify that he bought the land with the understanding that the county did not have a right of way over the land.</p> <p>2. Partnership. Deed by single partner to right 'of way for highway divests only that partner’s interest.</p> <p>Where a county sought to lay out a right of way for a public highway over the land of a citizen, and relied upon a- deed to such right of way signed by only one member of a partnership who formerly owned the land, it was error to grant a peremptory instruction for the county, because the deed in such case would only convey the interest of the partner executing it.</p> <p>3. Evidence. Minutes of county board exclusive and necessary evidence of actions of board in laying out highway.</p> <p>The board of supervisors can only act as a body, and its acts must be evidenced by its minutes. The minutes are the exclusive evidence of what the board did; and it is error to permit individual members of the board to testify as to what the board did or what it authorized in reference to laying out and establishing a public highway.</p>