Legal Opinion
United States v. 44.00 Acres of Land
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided June 12, 1956No. 287, Docket 23895PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
I. The Defendant Landowner’s Appeal.
1. Rule 71A(h), together with Rule 53(e) (2) gave the judge authority to reject, in part, a finding of the Commissioners if “clearly erroneous” and to modify their award accordingly. He was not obliged to, although he had discretion to, remand their report to the Commissioners for a revised finding.
2. It is obvious to us, and it was to the judge, that, in valuing the property, the Commissioners (despite their statement that they took all pertinent factors into consideration) relied primarily on reproduction-cost-new less depreciation.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Catlin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- United States v. 531/4 ACRES OF LAND, ETC.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- United States v. HayesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1949
- United States v. Eighty Acres of Land in Williamson CountyDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1939
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- United States v. Frank S. BuhlerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- United States v. Twin City Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
- United States v. Twin City Power Company of Georgia, Twin City Power Company of Georgia v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1958
- United States of America, and Cross-Appellee v. W. R. Carroll, and Owner of Parcel No. 56 (Declaration of Taking No. 25), and Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1962
- United States v. VaterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.