Legal Opinion
Sutton v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided October 18, 2012No. 09-648LPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND OPINION
HODGES, Judge.
Plaintiffs in this rails-to-trails case are landowners in Sacramento, California. They allege that the United States acquired the use of their property without due compensation by authorizing an easement on their lands for recreational trail use.
*438Plaintiffs and defendant filed cross motions for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The parties briefed their arguments on all aspects of defendant’s alleged liability, including whether plaintiffs have a cognizable property interest in the land. We grant plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment on liability for…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Mingus Constructors, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Sri International v. Matsushita Electric Corporation of America and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Preseault v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Haggart v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Geneva Rock Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Burgess v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- McClurg Family Farm, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
- Douglas R. Bigelow Trust v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.