{
  "id": 8722232,
  "name": "ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. Carlton A. SMITH et ux",
  "name_abbreviation": "Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Smith",
  "decision_date": "1975-02-17",
  "docket_number": "74-260",
  "first_page": "617",
  "last_page": "617",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "257 Ark. 617"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "519 S.W.2d 64"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "252 Ark. 1037",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1630083
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1972,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/252/1037-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 138,
    "char_count": 1249,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.861,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20854208102480107
    },
    "sha256": "9b3a80e2d0e48f5037e20c3d2354756b233f3d643bdf74dd0f59b6b5dd45190f",
    "simhash": "1:024fa879cc0241fd",
    "word_count": 213
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:16:07.797047+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. Carlton A. SMITH et ux"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "George Rose Smith, Justice.\nIn this condemnation case the Highway Commission appeals from a verdict and judgment fixing the landowners\u2019 compensation at $4,000. The testimony of the landowners\u2019 expert witness, a professional appraiser with 44 years\u2019 experience, amply supports the verdict. Nor was there any error in the court\u2019s refusal to strike the \u201cbefore\u201d value testimony of Carlton A. Smith, one of the owners. He had lived in the community for 27 years and had watched the sales of land in the area through the years. He valued his farm at $2,000 an acre and stated on cross-examination, without objection, that he had been offered that amount for his land. Such an offer, like hearsay, is not admissible as proof of value, but we have held that hearsay testimony, if not objected to, may support a verdict. Ark. State Highway Commn. v. Bradford, 252 Ark. 1037, 482 S.W. 2d 107 (1972). An offer falls in the same category. It was not shown that the offer in question was not an adequate basis for Smith\u2019s opinion.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "George Rose Smith, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Thomas B. Keys and Philip N. Gowen, for appellant.",
      "Douglas Bradley and Jon R. Coleman, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. Carlton A. SMITH et ux\n74-260\n519 S.W. 2d 64\nOpinion delivered February 17, 1975\nThomas B. Keys and Philip N. Gowen, for appellant.\nDouglas Bradley and Jon R. Coleman, for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0617-01",
  "first_page_order": 653,
  "last_page_order": 653
}