Image
Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Details
Member of
More Info
Rights
Digital Provenance
Publisher
Transcription
1 2 ?anc 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 # such property sh all not be taken unless fo r a more necessary public use than that to which i t has been already appropriated * • is e s - provided that such franchise sh all not fee. taken unless fo r free highways., railroad s or other more necessary public use. Section 9156 provides that before property can fee taken i t must appear f i r s t , that the use to. which i t is to be applied is a use authorized by law"? second, that the taxing is necessary to such usej third, i f already appropriated to some public use that the public use to which i t is to fee applied is a more necessary public use* The question to fee determined hereunder, therefore, is whether the property and franchises of la s Vegas land and Water Company sal Southern.Nevada Power Company, which ©re now devoted to public use, can be taken by the municipality fo r the purpose of devoting i t to the same or identical use I t now has. The general rule o f law as la id down la MO 0* J. at Page §98 Is that while the power may be exorcised in favor o f public uses over any and a ll property, private and even public, and the property ant franchises o f corporations as w ell as of in dividu als, although dedicated to public use®, may be taken fo r other public uses, th is.ru le is subject to the lim itation that property devoted to public us® cannot be taken to be used fo r the same purpose in the same manner, as this would amount simply to the taking o f property from one and giving i t to another without any benefit or advantage whatever to the public « « . . . and, the la rg e r public use and more general public benefit resu ltin g from the operation o f a public u t ilit y by municipality w i ll warrant a condemnation by the la tt e r o f property taken by a private corporation fo r a lik e purpose* la support of the above underlined statement are cited only two cases from the State of Washington, namely, Tacoma vs Hisqually Power Company, 197 P a c ific , 199, and State vs. King County Superior Court, 138 P a c ific , £77*