E. W. BLANCETT

v.

STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Citator

Cited By

• Oklahoma Ex rel. Phillips v. GUY F. Atkinson Co., 313 U.S. 508 (U.S. 1941)
  …rference with the sovereignty of the state.58 United States v. Appalachian Power Co., supra, p, 428. The fact that land is owned by a state is no barrier to its condemnation by the United States. Wayne County v. United States, 53 Ct. Cls. 417, aff’d 252 U. S. 574. There is no complaint that any property owner will not receive just compensa-. tion for the. land taken. The possible adverse effect on the tax revenues of Oklahoma as a result of the. exercise by the Federal Government of its power of eminent do-m…
• Jefferson Cnty. v. Tenn. Valley Auth., 146 F.2d 564 (6th Cir. 1945)
  …ifth Amendment with respect to just compensation. Town of Bedford v. United States, 1 Cir., 23 F. 2d 453, 56 A.L.R. 360; United States v. Wheeler Township, 8 Cir., 66 F. 2d 977; Wayne County, Ky. v. United States, 53 Ct.Cl. 417, affirmed per curiam, 252 U.S. 574, 40 S.Ct. 394, 64 L.Ed. 723; Town of Nahant v. United States, 1 Cir., 136 F. 273, 69 L.R.A. 723. Appellant insists that the true measure of “just compensation” for the taking of such property is the cost of restoring the property to the same condit…
• United States v. Wheeler TP., 66 F.2d 977 (8th Cir. 1933)
  …includes property which is ordinarily regarded as public property — such as that held for public uses by a state, St. Louis v. Western Union Tel. Co., 148. U. S. 92, 101, 13 S. Ct. 485, 37 L. Ed. 380, or by a municipal unit, U. S. v. Wayne County, 252 U. S. 574, 40 S. Ct. 394, 64 L. Ed. 723; Postal Telegraph-Cable Co. v. Richmond, 249 U. S. 252, 259, 260, 39 S. Ct. 265, 63 L. Ed. 590; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Richmond, 224 U. S. 160, 169, 32 S. Ct. 449; 56 L. Ed. 710; City of Richmond v. So. Bell Tel. & T…