Legal Opinion
Charles R. Kunkes and Marguerite v. Kunkes v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided March 15, 1996No. 95-5031PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PLAGER, Circuit Judge.
This case arises under the Takings clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. 1 By legislation enacted in 1992, Congress required that in order to retain their unpatent-ed mining claims, claim holders must pay a per-claim annual fee of $100 for each of the years 1993 and 1994. This cash payment requirement replaced a prior requirement that the claim holders perform $100 worth of exploration and development work yearly on those claims. Appellants Charles and Marguerite Kunkes, who owned a number of these unpatented mining claims, failed to pay the amount required…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. DeBenedictisSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. LockeSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Gilbert M. Hair and Ethel Blaine Millett (On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Reoforce, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Jones v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Freeman v. United States Department of the InteriorDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Thurner v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2003
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.