Private property shall not be taken or damaged, for public or private use, without just compensation. Such compensation shall be ascertained by a board of commissioners, of not less than three freeholders, or by a jury, when required by the owner of the property, in such manner as may be prescribed by law, and until the same shall be paid to the owner, or into court for the owner, the property shall not be needlessly disturbed, or the proprietary rights of the owner therein divested; and whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public.

Source: Entire article added, effective August 1, 1876, see L. 1877, p. 30.

Cross references: (1) For judicial aspects of the question of necessity when property is to be taken under this section for public or quasi-public purposes, see: Rothwell v. Coffin, 122 Colo. 140, 220 P. 2d 1063 (1950); Pine Martin Mining Co. v. Empire Zinc Co. , 90 Colo. 529, 11 P. 2d 221 (1932); Jennings v. Bd. of Com. Montrose Co. , 85 Colo. 498, 277 P. 467 (1929); Haver v. Matonock, 75 Colo. 301, 225 P. 834 (1924); Colo. & Utah Coal Co. v. Walter, 75 Colo. 489, 226 P. 864 (1924); Snider v. Town of Platteville, 75 Colo. 589, 227 P. 548 (1924); Wassenich v. City & County of Denver, 67 Colo. 456, 186 P. 533 (1919); Lavelle v. Town of Julesburg, 49 Colo. 290, 112 P. 774 (1910); Kirkwood v. School Dist. Summit County, 45 Colo. 368, 101 P. 343 (1909); Schneider v. Schneider, 36 Colo. 518, 86 P. 347 (1906); Union Pac. R. R. v. Colo. Postal Telegraph Co. , 30 Colo. 133, 69 P. 594 (1902); Gibson v. Cann, 28 Colo. 499, 66 P. 879 (1901); Warner v. Town of Gunnison, 2 Colo. App. 430, 31 P. 238 (1892). (Compare: Town of Eaton v. Bouslog, 133 Colo. 130, 292 P. 2d 343 (1956), and Otero Irr. Dist. v. Enderud, 122 Colo. 136, 220 P. 2d 862 (1950); Crystal Park Co. v. Morton, 27 Colo. App. 74, 146 P. 566 (1915); Thompson v. DeWeese-Dye Ditch Co. , 25 Colo. 243, 53 P. 507 (1898); Seidler v. Seely, 8 Colo. App. 499, 46 P. 848 (1896); Sand Creek Lateral Irrigation v. Davis, 17 Colo. 326, 29 P. 742 (1892). )

(2) For jurisdiction of federal court, when (properly) invoked, see County of Allegheny v. Frank Mashuda Company, 360 U. S. 185 (1959), and Louisiana Power & Light Company v. City of Thibodaux, 360 U. S. 25 (1959).

(3) For taking of private property for private use, see § 14 of this article; for deprivation of property without due process of law, see § 25 of this article; for eminent domain, see articles 1 to 7 of title 38.