ROBERT A. KATZ, TRUSTEE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF CONNECTICUT AND HOWARD S. IVES, STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the district court's decision, finding the appellant's federal action was barred by res judicata.
Appellant claimed the state's delay in condemning his property violated his constitutional rights. This claim was denied by a State Referee, but appel…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Fifth Amendment (Takings Clause) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
We affirm on the opinion of Judge Blumenfeld, 307 F.Supp. 480 in the District Court with this brief additional comment.
The appellant, Katz, at the trial before the State Referee, made the claim that the long delay by the State of Connecticut in taking the condemned property violated his rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Federal Constitution which prohibited the taking of his property without just compensation. The State Referee denied this claim, as the district court noted, and granted Katz an exception, but Katz did not appeal this denial to the Supreme Court of Connecticut, as he could have. Instead, he started this federal question action in the United States District Court based on precisely the same claim.
At oral argument he cited as his authority for this maneuver Foster v. City of Detroit, Michigan, 405 F. 2d 138 (6 Cir. 1968), not mentioned in his brief. That case is, however, inapposite because the claim of unconstitutional taking without just compensation was not adjudicated in the Michigan state court, and therefore there was no issue of res ad judicata. It also appears that at the time the federal action was brought, the state condemnation case had been withdrawn and the subsequent state condemnation action had not been commenced.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blanche Mitchell v. Nat'l Broad. Co. & S. Theodore Nygreen, 553 F.2d 265 (2d Cir. 1977)
-
Tang v. App. Div. OF the NEW York Supreme Court, 487 F.2d 138 (2d Cir. 1973)
-
Fountain v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 678 F.2d 1038 (11th Cir. 1982)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Foster v. City OF Detroit, 405 F.2d 138 (6th Cir. 1968)