Legal Opinion

Board of County Supervisors v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 3, 1991No. 90-364LPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Judge.

This case is before the court on defendant’s motion for partial dismissal pursuant to RUSCC 12(b)(4), for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants defendant’s motion.

FACTS

In 1986, Hazel-Peterson Companies (Hazel) acquired approximately 542 acres of property near Manassas in Prince William County, Virginia (Prince William Tract), for approximately $9.8 million. This property adjoined the Manassas Battlefield Park and, at the time of the purchase, was zoned agriculture (A-l). The park, as is…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. English v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. Armstrong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. United States v. CausbySupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. United States v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
  5. Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cienega Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
  2. Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County, Virginia v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
  3. M & J Coal Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1994
  4. Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1992
  5. Board of County Supervisors v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996

3 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