Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Hall

Fourth Circuit

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Hall

527 F.2d 1166

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 23, 1975·No. Nos. 75-1477, 75-1539·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We think that the district court correctly decided that jurisdiction was vested in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to hear and determine a condemnation action instituted by Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to condemn the land located within that district. Jurisdiction was vested by § 81 of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact and it was not ousted by § 82(b) of that agreement.

The judgment of the district court is Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

We think that the district court correctly decided that jurisdiction was vested in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to hear and determine a condemnation action instituted by Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to condemn the land located within that district. Jurisdiction was vested by § 81 of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact and it was not ousted by § 82(b) of that agreement.

The judgment of the district court is Affirmed.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Hall, 527 F.2d 1166 (4th Cir. 1975).

Pincite

527 F.2d 1166 (Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Hall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Rose K. Hall, Owner of Parcel Vk047, Parcel of Land in Arlington County, Virginia, and Four Parcels of Land in Arlington County, Virginia, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Arlington Trust Company, Inc., a Virginia Corporation, and Rose K. Hall, Owner of Parcel Vk047

527 F.2d 1166 (Fourth Circuit, 1975)

Opinion

Related