Sherwood v. Pearl River Valley Water Supply District
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1DissentGodbold, Circuit Judge
(dissenting) :
I am unable to join my colleagues in their disposition of this case.
As one of the grounds for relief against a state court judgment of condemnation, the appellant administrator alleged that by eminent domain, and by deed under threat of eminent domain, the defendant Water Supply District acquired all land within a quarter of a mile of the perimeter of the reservoir created by it “with the exception of lands belonging to or were acquired [sic] by officers, employees and promoters of the defendant District, which were allowed to remain in their hands for private development,” so…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Dino Iacaponi v. New Amsterdam Casualty Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
- Guam Investment Company, Inc. v. Central Building, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
- Pearl River Valley Water Supply District v. BrownMississippi Supreme Court · 1966
- Florasynth Laboratories, Inc. v. GoldbergCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951
- Scott v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.