Pvm Redwood Company, Inc. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1DissentAlarcon, Circuit Judge
I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the order dismissing the complaint and direct the district court to permit PVM to attempt to amend the pleading to state its claim in a clear and concise manner. I believe that PVM has set forth facts which establish that its property has been taken by the government.
I am in complete agreement with my colleagues’ fine analysis and rejection of PVM’s statutory claim for relief. I do not agree with the majority’s interpretation of PVM’s constitutional claim.
*1330I.
THE STATUTORY CLAIM
PVM argues that since the Expansion • Act provides for employees, whose…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Armstrong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.