46-247. Ditches, dams, or similar works; construction; eminent domain; procedure.
In case of the refusal of the owner or claimant of any lands through which such ditch, canal, or other works are proposed to be made or constructed, to allow the passage thereof, the person desiring the right-of-way may acquire same through the exercise of the power of eminent domain. The procedure to condemn property shall be exercised in the manner set forth in sections 76-704 to 76-724.
Source
Annotations
Requirements of petition stated. Little v. Loup River Public Power Dist., 150 Neb. 864, 36 N.W.2d 261 (1949).
A public power and irrigation district is given the power of condemnation by procedure in the county where the lands are situated if the owners of land object to construction. State ex rel. Johnson v. Central Nebraska Public Power & Irr. Dist., 140 Neb. 471, 300 N.W. 379 (1941).
Damages recoverable in a condemnation proceeding must be based upon the value of the land in the condition it was at the time of the condemnation. In re Platte Valley Public Power & Irr. Dist., 137 Neb. 313, 289 N.W. 383 (1939).
When defect of misjoinder of parties appears on face of petition, it must be raised by special demurrer. Johnson v. Platte Valley Public Power & Irr. Dist., 133 Neb. 97, 274 N.W. 386 (1937).
To confer jurisdiction, the petition in a condemnation proceeding must describe the lands to be crossed, the size of the ditch, canal, or works to be constructed, the quantity of the land to be taken, and the names of the parties interested. Platte Valley Public Power & Irr. Dist. v. Feltz, 132 Neb. 227, 271 N.W. 787 (1937).
Individual does not have right of eminent domain for irrigation of his own land. Onstott v. Airdale Ranch & Cattle Co., 129 Neb. 54, 260 N.W. 556 (1935).
Petition must, with substantial accuracy, describe lands to be crossed, size of works to be constructed, and quantity of land to be taken. Blue River Power Co. v. Hronik, 112 Neb. 500, 199 N.W. 788 (1924).
Right of eminent domain cannot be exercised for purely private purpose. Vetter v. Broadhurst, 100 Neb. 356, 160 N.W. 109 (1916).