Cole v. Texas Power Light Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Texas Powers&sLight Co. v. Cole

    313 S.W.2d 524 (Tex. 1958)   Cited 52 times
    Finding condemnor did not loose its right to abandon a portion of the condemned property where, at the time of trial, condemnor did not physically occupy the property and had not interfered with the property owner's mining operations; the court reasoned that the condemnor's revision of the taking line could take effect without injury to the property owner

    The defendants [158 Tex. 497] appealed and the Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded. 306 S.W.2d 762. We reverse the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals and affirm that of the County Court at Law No. 1.

  2. Coastal Indus Water v. Celanese

    578 S.W.2d 544 (Tex. Civ. App. 1979)   Cited 2 times

    The interest in land taken must be definite and clear. Cole v. Texas Power Light Co., 306 S.W.2d 762 (Tex.Civ.App. Dallas 1957, rev'd on other grounds, 158 Tex. 495, 313 S.W.2d 524). The description of the extent and use of the easement as set out in the petition serves the following purposes: 1. as notice to the opposing party of the basis of damages to which he may be entitled; 2. as a basis for admission of evidence as to damages; and 3. for use by the trial court in instructing the jury.