FEDERAL · 16 U.S.C. · Chapter SUBCHAPTER I—REGULATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATER POWER AND RESOURCES
Exercise by licensee of power of eminent domain
16 U.S.C. § 814
Title16 — Conservation
ChapterSUBCHAPTER I—REGULATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATER POWER AND RESOURCES
This text of 16 U.S.C. § 814 (Exercise by licensee of power of eminent domain) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
16 U.S.C. § 814.
Text
When any licensee cannot acquire by contract or pledges an unimproved dam site or the right to use or damage the lands or property of others necessary to the construction, maintenance, or operation of any dam, reservoir, diversion structure, or the works appurtenant or accessory thereto, in conjunction with any improvement which in the judgment of the commission is desirable and justified in the public interest for the purpose of improving or developing a waterway or waterways for the use or benefit of interstate or foreign commerce, it may acquire the same by the exercise of the right of eminent domain in the district court of the United States for the district in which such land or other property may be located, or in the State courts. The practice and procedure in any action or proceedi
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida
414 U.S. 661 (Supreme Court, 1974)
City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma
357 U.S. 320 (Supreme Court, 1958)
Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation
362 U.S. 99 (Supreme Court, 1960)
Escondido Mutual Water Co. v. La Jolla Band of Mission Indians
466 U.S. 765 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Litecubes, LLC v. Northern Light Products, Inc.
523 F.3d 1353 (Federal Circuit, 2008)
Georgia Power Co. v. 54.20 Acres of Land
563 F.2d 1178 (Fifth Circuit, 1977)
Southern Natural Gas Co. v. Land, Cullman County
197 F.3d 1368 (Eleventh Circuit, 1999)
Marseilles Hydro Power, LLC v. Marseilles Land & Water Co.
518 F.3d 459 (Seventh Circuit, 2008)
United States v. 33.5 Acres of Land
789 F.2d 1396 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
Grand River Dam Authority v. Grand-Hydro
335 U.S. 359 (Supreme Court, 1949)
Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC v. Real Estate
255 F. Supp. 3d 1213 (N.D. Florida, 2017)
Georgia Power Co. v. 138.30 Acres of Land
596 F.2d 644 (Fifth Circuit, 1979)
Public Utility District No. 1 of Pend Oreille County v. City of Seattle, City of Seattle v. Public Utility District No. 1 of Pend Oreille County
382 F.2d 666 (Ninth Circuit, 1967)
State of California, Ex Rel. State Water Resources Board v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Rock Creek Limited Partnership, Intervenor
877 F.2d 743 (Ninth Circuit, 1989)
Nez Perce Tribe v. Idaho Power Co.
847 F. Supp. 791 (D. Idaho, 1994)
Rivers Electric Co. v. 4.6 Acres of Land Located in Town of Catskill
731 F. Supp. 83 (N.D. New York, 1990)
Beezer v. City of Seattle
373 P.2d 796 (Washington Supreme Court, 1962)
Jordan v. Randolph Mills, Inc.
29 B.R. 398 (M.D. North Carolina, 1983)
Chapman v. Public Utility District No. 1
367 F.2d 163 (Ninth Circuit, 1966)
Clay King and Dorothy Lee King v. Grand River Dam Authority, a Public Corporation
336 F.2d 682 (Tenth Circuit, 1964)
Source Credit
History
(June 10, 1920, ch. 285, pt. I, §21, 41 Stat. 1074; renumbered pt. I, Aug. 26, 1935, ch. 687, title II, §212, 49 Stat. 847; Pub. L. 102–486, title XVII, §1701(d), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3009.)
Editorial Notes
Editorial Notes
Amendments
1992—Pub. L. 102–486 substituted final proviso and sentence for period at end.
Amendments
1992—Pub. L. 102–486 substituted final proviso and sentence for period at end.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
16 U.S.C. § 814, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/16/814.