Legal Opinion

Grand River Dam Authority v. Grand-Hydro

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided March 7, 1949No. 6PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burton

The federal question in this action for condemnation under Oklahoma law is whether the Federal Power Act1 had so far affected the use or value of certain land for power site purposes as to render inadmissible expert testimony which gave recognition to that land's availability for a power site. We hold that it had not. We thus see no adequate reason to reverse the Supreme Court of Oklahoma which had held that such testimony was properly admitted in a state condemnation proceeding.

This action was brought by the petitioner, Grand River Dam Authority, in the District Court for Mayes County,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Davis v. WechslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Enterprise Irrigation District v. Farmers Mutual Canal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  3. American Railway Express Co. v. LeveeSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  4. Nutt v. KnutSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  5. City of Tulsa v. CreekmoreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Stanley Works v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1986
  2. Federal Power Commission v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1954
  3. United States v. Grand River Dam AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  4. United States v. Ashland Oil and Transportation Co., a Subsidiary of Ashland Oil Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
  5. Georgia Power Co. v. 138.30 Acres of LandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API