Legal Opinion
Schultz v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided May 31, 1984No. 517-82LPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SETO, Judge:
In this inverse condemnation action, plaintiff seeks recovery, based on the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, for a taking of his properly, and asserts that the passage of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1287, in 1968, effected a taking of his property. Moreover, plaintiff contends that repeated and continuous acts by various government officials have been so incompatible with plaintiff’s recognized rights of ownership that a compensable taking has occurred.
Defendant has moved pursuant to RUSCC 12(c) for judgment on the pleadings,…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Armstrong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Orion Corporation v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1987
- Johns-Manville Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1987
- District of Columbia v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- J.M. Huber Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
- Weeks Dredging & Contracting, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1986
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.