The State Highway Commission, Appellant v. Bloom, Respondent

Summary

The court held that the ranch was generally a unified tract for condemnation damages, but the separately located 240-acre flood-irrigated hayland was not shown to be used as part of that ranching unit and could not receive severance damages. The court also held that damages could reflect the highway project as a whole, including construction on government land, and that denying a jury view was not an abuse of discretion. The $25,000 award was conditionally affirmed after a $1,380 reduction for the unsupported severance damages, but otherwise the judgment was to be reversed.