
    LATEX GAS CO. et al. v. ADAMS et al.
    (No. 1629.)
    Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.
    Dec. 30, 1927.
    Rehearing Denied Jan. 11, 1928.
    Eminent domain <⅜=>150 — $400 in condemnation suit for right of way for gas pipe line, taking narrow strip from lots worth $6,000, held not excessive.
    $400 verdict in condemnation suit for right of way for g’as pipe line, taking 10-foot strip of land at junction of two lots, 5 feet from each of lots, one of which was worth $5,000 and the other $1,000, and as incident thereto giving gas company right of ingress and egress and preventing owners from building fence across right of way or from building house upon it, held not excessive.
    Appeal from District Court, Jasper County ; Y. H. Stark, Judge.
    Suit between the Latex Gas Company and others and Kittie Adams and others. From a judgment awarding damages to Kittie Adams and others, the Latex Gas Company and others appeal.
    Affirmed.
    F. J. Scurlock and J. W. Hassell, both of Dallas, and G. E. Richardson and Smith' & Lanier, all of Jasper, for appellants.
    John T. Beaty and Roi Blake, both of Jasper, for appellees.
   WALKER, J.

Appellees own adjoining lots, Nos. 1 and 2, in the town of Jasper. Lot No. 2 faces Houston street and lot No. 1 faces Adams street. Each of thes'e lots is in the form of a square 166% feet by 166% feet. Without appellees’ consent, appellant built its gas pipe line across this property, consuming in its right of way 5 feet off the south end of lot No. 2 and 5 feet off the north end of lot No. 1. In its effect this was a condemnation suit, and appellees were awarded a judgment against appellant for $400 as the value of the right of way 10x166% feet across their property.

That the verdict is excessive is the only assignment of error. Incident to the right of way appellant has the right of ingress and egress over appellees’ property through this right of way, and appellees cannot build a fence, across this right of way, nor can they build a house upon it. Lot No. 1 is worth $5,000 and lot No. 2 is worth $1,000. Without further discussion, the assignment of error is overruled and the judgment of the trial court affirmed.

Affirmed. 
      <§^>For other cases see same topic and KRY-NXJMBBR in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     