Legal Opinion
R. H. Phillips and Jessie E. Phillips, His Wife v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 22, 1957No. 15156_1PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEMMON, Circuit Judge.
Never niggardly in its standards for the compensation of the expropriated landowner, the Supreme Court has grown progressively more liberal in its canons for the reimbursement of those who are dispossessed through the exercise of the right of eminent domain.
In evaluating condemned real estate, the total worth of the property must be considered. It frequently has been remarked that expropriation is an action in rem. It is not concerned with the taking of the rights of different persons, but with the seizure of the property itself.
If we attempt to cut a condemnation…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- United States v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Olson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- The Minnesota Rate CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Boom Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Eisenring v. Kansas Turnpike AuthoritySupreme Court of Kansas · 1958
- Yoder v. Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian ReservationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- United States v. 237,500 Acres of Land, more or less, in the counties of Inyo & Kern, State of CaliforniaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1964
- Bernard Goldfine v. United States of America, Mildred Paperman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1959
- State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. AntonioliMontana Supreme Court · 1965
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.