Schroeder Besse Oyster Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtWhaley, Chief Justice
The plaintiffs are oyster growers in and near Onset Bay in the town of Wareham in the State of Massachusetts, and held licenses to plant, grow, and dig oysters in certain lots. The individual plaintiffs held their licenses for the use and benefit of the Schroeder Besse Oyster Company, Inc. They claim no separate interest.
Under the River and Harbor Act of 1935, act of August 30, 1935, 49 Stat. 1028, 1029, the Government undertook the improvement of Cape Cod Canal as set out in the act, and Rivers and Harbors Committee Document No. 15, 74th Congress, 1st Session, and commenced dredging…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- F. Mansfield & Sons Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1941
- Andrew Radel Oyster Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1934
3Cited by9 opinions
- Fisherman's Harvest, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Fisherman's Harvest v. Pbs & J (Formerly Known as Espey, Huston & Associates) v. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Petrovich v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
- H. J. Lewis Oyster Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1952
- LaFont v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.