Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kohl Industrial Park Co. (A Partnership) v. The County of Rockland

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided June 7, 1983No. 713, Docket 82-7693Published

1DissentNeaher, District Judge

I respectfully dissent. The federal courts should not permit § 1983 to be used as a means to obtain undeserved payment from public funds. In this action, Kohl never had a valid claim; the complaint alleges an uncompensated “taking”, but presents no facts which would allow a court to find a fifth amendment violation. Moreover, the relief Kohl seeks, an order compelling the condemnation of a fee simple interest, is not a remedy any court could provide to Kohl. As discussed below, this action should be remanded to the district court for the purpose of entertaining a motion to dismiss for failure…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Danforth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  3. City of Buffalo v. J. W. Clement Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
  4. Matter of Board of Water Supply of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  5. Joseph Chacon, Jr. v. Sam Granata, and Randolph Air Force BaseCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975

18 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