Hasselblad v. City of Green Bay
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtLaROCQUE, J.
The plaintiffs, Walter and Marie Hasselblad, d/b/a Hasselblad Machine Company, seek to have declared unconstitutional the Wisconsin statute setting a $50,000 limit on business replacement damages in eminent domain proceedings. They claim that the limit is contrary to art. I, sec. 13, of the Wisconsin Constitution, which provides: "The property of no person shall be taken for public use without just compensation therefor.” Because the Hasselblads have failed to demonstrate the statute unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt, we affirm.
The Hasselblads were business partners whose commercial…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Klopping v. City of WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Sambs v. City of BrookfieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Luber v. Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Quinn v. Town of DodgevilleCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- City of Janesville v. CC Midwest, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
- Eberle v. Dane County Board of AdjustmentWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. BertrandCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1991
- Management Computer Services, Inc. v. Hawkins, Ash, Baptie & Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1998
- City of Janesville v. CC Midwest, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.