United States v. Honolulu Plantation Co. Honolulu Plantation Co. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
JAMES ALGER FEE, District Judge.
The United States instituted thirteen actions, now consolidated, to condemn land in Hawaii. Honolulu Plantation Company had several claims for compensation, part of which have been paid. But Plantation claims “severance damages” because of loss of value of its properties as an operating concern by condemnation of property held in fee by third parties, resulting in an overcapacity of the sugar mill and refinery,, since it was claimed there was failure to obtain the customary supply of cane from such fields.
All the relevant evidence as to the claim of “severance…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Sartor v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States Ex Rel. Tennessee Valley Authority v. PowelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Bauman v. RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- United States v. Petty Motor Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Miller v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1980
- United States v. 429.59 Acres of LandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- International Paper Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
- Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1980
- United States v. Percy Smith and Ella SmithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.