Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States

250 U.S. 1, 39 S. Ct. 399, 63 L. Ed. 809, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 1704
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided May 19, 1919·No. 381·Published·Cited by 27 cases

Opinion

Memorandum opinion by

The Chief Justice.

Recovery was sought in the court below from the United States for property taken by it as the result of the alleged firing of guns in a fortification-on the coast of Maine and the passing of the projectiles oyer and across *2 a portion of the land alleged to have been taken. The court finding that a former case by it decided against the owners and here affirmed (Peabody v. United States, 231 U. S. 530), for taking of the same land resulting from instances of gun fire resulting from the same fort and guns, was identical with this, except for some occasional subsequent acts of gun fire, held that case to be conclusive of this and rejected the claim on the merits.

Coming to consider this action of the court in the light of the findings by it made, we are constrained to the con-, elusion that it was right and that no possible difference exists between this and the Peabody Case. Before applying this conclusion we say that we find that the record discloses no ground for the applications here made to remand and for additional findings.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States, 250 U.S. 1, 39 S. Ct. 399, 63 L. Ed. 809, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 1704 (1919).

250 U.S. 1 (Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Orr v. United States
Federal Claims, 2023
Benson v. State
2006 SD 8 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 2006)
State ex rel. Coffey v. District Court of Oklahoma County
1976 OK 29 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1976)
State Ex Rel. Coffey v. DISTRICT COURT OF OKL. CTY.
547 P.2d 947 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1976)
Cravens v. United States
163 F. Supp. 309 (W.D. Arkansas, 1958)
North Counties Hydro-Electric Co. v. United States
151 F. Supp. 322 (Court of Claims, 1957)
Gerlach Livestock Co. v. United States
76 F. Supp. 87 (Court of Claims, 1948)
Gerlach Live Stock Co. v. United States
76 F. Supp. 87 (Court of Claims, 1948)
Garrett v. Jones
1948 OK 41 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1948)
Causby v. United States
75 F. Supp. 262 (Court of Claims, 1948)
United States v. Dickinson
152 F.2d 865 (Fourth Circuit, 1946)
United States Ex Rel. Jordan v. Ickes
143 F.2d 152 (D.C. Circuit, 1944)
Matthews v. United States
87 Ct. Cl. 662 (Court of Claims, 1938)
Sponenbarger v. United States
21 F. Supp. 28 (E.D. Arkansas, 1937)
State Ex Rel. Board of County Commissioners v. Bruce
69 P.2d 97 (Montana Supreme Court, 1937)
United States v. Yazoo & M. V. R.
4 F. Supp. 366 (E.D. Louisiana, 1933)
Hurley v. Kincaid
285 U.S. 95 (Supreme Court, 1932)
Swetland v. Curtiss Airports Corporation
41 F.2d 929 (N.D. Ohio, 1930)
Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States
64 Ct. Cl. 572 (Court of Claims, 1928)