Legal Opinion

Moore v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided December 19, 2002No. 93-134 LPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BRUGGINK, Judge.

This is a class action in which the plaintiff class members seek' compensation for the imposition of an easement for recreational trail use on their land. The court has previously ruled that the government did in fact take such an easement without compensation. Glosemeyer v. United States, 45 Fed.Cl. 771 (2000) (including the consolidated case of Moore v. United States, No. 93-134L). Because nearly 300 landowners opted into the class, the parties agreed to identify categories of property. The court could then determine compensation for a representative parcel from each…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Glosemeyer v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2000

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Moore v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
  2. McCann Holdings, Ltd. v. the United States 0United States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  3. Illig v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
  4. Fisher v. Virginia Electric & Power Co.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2003
  5. Moore v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003

8 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