Legal Opinion

Norfolk Redevelopment & Housing Authority v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. of Virginia

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided November 1, 1983No. 81-2332PublishedCited by 153 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rehnquist

Respondent Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. of Virginia (C&P) was required to relocate some of its telephone transmission facilities by reason of a street realignment. It sought compensation from petitioner Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority (NRHA), the local government agency responsible for the urban renewal plan which caused the street realignment. C&P claimed that it was a “displaced person” as that term is defined in the Uniform Relocation Act, 1 passed by Congress in 1970. We hold that C&P is not a “displaced person” within the meaning of the Act.

The Relocation Act provides…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  4. Robert C. Herd & Co. v. Krawill MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1959
  5. Shaw v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880

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

3Cited by153 opinions

  1. United States v. Orlando Cordia Hall, Also Known as LanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
  2. Marquis v. Hartford Accident & IndemnityMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Southwestern Bell Telephone, L.P. v. EmmettTexas Supreme Court · 2015
  4. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Central Savings and Loan Association v. Daniel T. McSweeney Frederick C. StalderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  5. Sam L. Majors Jewelers v. ABX, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997

148 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