Beres v. States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HORN, Judge.
The plaintiffs in this case allege that the United States has taken their property by claiming a reversionary interest in a railroad right-of-way that traverses over their property and denying plaintiffs the use of their property. Specifically, in their complaint, the plaintiffs allege that by issuing a Notice of Interim Trail Use (NITU), and converting the railroad right-of-way to a trail, the United States imposed an additional burden on their property, denying them their property interest in the right-of-way, resulting in a taking of their property. Therefore, plaintiffs…
2Cases cited128 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
123 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Brandt v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- Union Pacific Railroad v. Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Beres v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Samuel C. Johnson 1988 Trust v. Bayfield CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
- Beres v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.