Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Heyward v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided January 29, 1917No. 26520Published

The Reporter’s statement of the case:

1ConcurrenceCampbell, Chief Justice

I concur in the conclusion reached in this case because of the Lynah case. But for that case, I would conclude that the principle announced in Gibson's case, 166 U. S., 269, 29 C. Cls., 18; Bedford's case, 192 U. S., 217, 36 C. Cls., 474, and Greenleaf v. Garrison, 237 U. S., 251, would govern.

The lands claimed to have been taken were subject to tidal overflow twice daily until by embankments and other artificial means overflows were controlled and the lands drained at low tide. In improving the navigation of Savannah River the Government was exercising a constitutional right and power. Its…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gibson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. Bedford v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  3. Greenleaf Johnson Lumber Co. v. GarrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  4. Bedford v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API