« ForrigeFortsett »
AMENDMENT V. RIGHTS OF PERSONS
NOTES OF DECISIONS In general.—Protection of constitutional Government, there may be claimed and alprovision prohibiting taking of private lowed, in the form of interest, such addition property for public use by United States to the value of the property at the time of without just compensation cannot be de- the taking as will produce the full equivanied (Const. Amend. 5). U. S. v. Wheeler lent of that value paid contemporaneously TP (C. C. A. 1933), 66 F. (20) 977, 978. with the taking. Jacobs et al. v. U. S.
The obligation of the United States to (1933), 290 U. S. 13. pay just compensation for private property Plaintiffs allowed just compensation for taken under its power of eminent domain the exclusive use and occupation of their rests upon the Fifth Amendment, independ-land as a camp site and artillery range, ent of statute or express promise. Jacobs
taken over by the Government under its et al. v. U. S. (1933), 290 U. S. 13, revers- military powers in time of war. Interest ing (C. C. A. 1933) 63 F. (20) 326.
allowed as part of just compensation from A promise to pay is implied because the the date of relinquishment of the property duty is imposed by the Amendment. Id. by the Government to the date of payment.
Constitutional requirement of just com- Included also in just compensation is the pensation for property taken for public use cost of locating, excavating, and removing was not suspended by war. U. S. v. Mc- or exploding unexploded shells left buried Intosh (D. C. 1932), 2 F. Supp. 245.
in the ground. West v. U. S. (1931), 73 Company in building railroad along bank Ct. Cls. 201. of navigable river had right to rely upon Where the use of plaintiff's property was continued maintenance of natural level, taken by the Government and thereafter the width, and flow thereof, and right to in- fee, the plaintiff is entitled to just comcrease artificially such level, width, and pensation for the use in addition to that for flow to railroad's injury beyond that pro- taking of the fee, and the just compensavided by nature could be obtained by United tion to be awarded includes interest at a States only by exercise of right of eminent proper rate from the termination of the use domain, and payment of just compensation (acquirement of the title) to the date paid. (33 U. S. C. A. 591, Act Jan. 21, 1927, 44 Hamburg-American Co. v. U. S. (1932), 74 Stat. 1010; Const. Amend. 5). United Ct. Cls. 360. States v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. (C. C. A. The fact that the statute under which the 1936) 82 F. (20) 131.
taking was accomplished made no provision Amount and elements of compensation.
for just compensation does not affect plainUnder Constitution requiring "just compen- tiff's right thereto, which arises under the sation" only damages to residue of tract are guaranty of the Fifth Amendment, out of an allowable besides value of parcel taken by implied contract to pay just compensaGovernment. U. S. v. Crary et al. (D. C. tion. Id. 1932), 2 F. Supp. 870.
In condemnation proceeding, compensation If fixtures can be removed without sub
is allowable for proximate damages to restantial injury either to realty or to fixtures, maining parts of parcel of land when some they remain personalty, and need not be part thereof has been actually taken (Const. taken as part of realty as respects liability Amend. 5). United States v. Chicago, B. and therefor in Federal condemnation proceed. O. R. Co. (C. C. A. 1936), 82 F. (20) 131. ings. Futrovsky et al. v. U. S. (App. D. C. Consequential damage. The owners of the 1933), 66 F. (20) 215.
“Tarbert" and "Receiver" sand and gravel In absence of legislation by Congress, bars in the bed of the Mississippi River are costs and attorneys' fees incurred by land- not entitled to compensation for the sand owner in condemnation proceeding brought and gravel taken by the United States by Government held not allowable against from these bars and used for the imGovernment as part of “just compensation" provement of the navigation of the river by for property taken. U. S. v. Certain Lands revetting its banks, so as to confine the in Washington and Dakota Counties et al. waters of the river to its natural channel. (D. C. 1932), 2 F. Supp. 324.
(1916) 31 Op. Atty. Gen. 67. Just compensation for property taken for Where a dam was constructed in war purposes included interest for period navigable stream under statutory authority between time of taking and full payment. providing for its construction in aid of Act of July 1, 1918 (40 Stat. 704, 724), navigation, the purpose of its construction U. S. v. McIntosh et al. (D. C. 1932), 2 F. as expressed in the statute may not be Supp. 244,
questioned by the court. In a suit under the Tucker Act to recover The holder of a qualified title to lands just compensation for property taken by the in the bed of a navigable stream is not en
titled to recover as for a taking thereof by Direct damage.-- Where, in the making of the Government because of the Govern. public improvements, the Government closes ment's authorization and construction of a a roadway over which the owner of ad. dam in the stream in aid of navigation jacent lands had an established and recogbaving resulted in the impounding of anized easement or right-of-way between his surplus of water in the river and pool over lands and the public highway, there is an such lands, which surplus was licensed by impiled contract or agret ment on the part the Government for use by private parties. of the Government to pay the owner just Angelan Buchanan et al. v. U. S. (1934), compensation for the loss and damage sus78 Ct. Cls. 791.
tained by him, including interest as a part In action against the United States for thereof. Federal Real Estate Co., etc. v. damages caused to land by overflow of river U. S. (1934), 79 Ct. Cls. 667. because of construction of dam, damages in The overflowing of adjacent lands and tort could not be allowed (Jud. Code, sec. private roadways thereon resulting from the 24 (20), U. 8. C. A. 28:41 (20); Const. construction by the Government of a dam Amend. 5.). Christman v. United States in a navigable river in aid of navigation (C. C. A. 1934), 74 F. (2d) 112.
constitutes a taking of such property by the United States held not liable for conse- Government, and the owners are entitled to quential damages to land from overflow of recover just compensation therefor, includriver because of construction of dam, where ing as a part of such compensation interest damages resulted also from self-efficient on the value of the property from the time cause, by freshets running down creek (Jud. of the taking until payment is made. JohnCode, sec. 24 (20), U. S. C. A. 28 : 41 (20) ; son r. U. S. (1934), 80 Ct. Cls. 367. Const. Amend. 5). Id.
Time of payment.--Fifth Amendment does "Indirect" or "consequential damages" are not require that taking private property for those wbich do not arise as an immediat, public use by United States must be accomor natural and probable result of the act panied or preceded by payment. Lee et al. of the party, but as an incidental conse- v. U. S. (App. D. C. 1932), 58 F. (20) 879. quence. Damages are either "direct" or Validity of statutes.--Statute authorizing "consequential.” The former are such as advance taking of private property for pubresult from an act without the intervention lic use in District of Columbia, and provid. of any intermediate controlling or self-effi- ing for judgment against United States, cient cause, and the latter are such as are with interest, held not violative of Fifth rot produced without the concurrence of Amendment. Lee et al. v. U. S. (App. D. C. some other event attributable to the same 1932), 58 F. (20) 879. origin or cause. Id.
Owner accepting compensation for propOrdinarily, "consequential damages" are erty taken in condemnation cannot there. those which do not arise as immediate, after question validity of act under which natural, and probable result of act done, but property was taken or regularity of procearise from interposition of additional cause,
dure. U. S. v. McIntosh et al. (D. C. 1932), without which act done would have pro- 2 F. Supp. 244. duced no harmful result, while “proximate Statute authorizing President to take land damages” are those which accrue directly for Marine Corps post held constitutional as and in natural sequence, and as specific re- providing ultimately for judicial ascertainsult from act done, without intervention of ment of Just compensation. (Act of July 1, independent cause. United States v. Chi | 1918, 40 Stat. 704, 724.) Id. cago, B. & Q. R. Co. (C. C. A. 1936), 82 F. (20) 131.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Abridgement of privileges and immunities.— grounds, is not repugnant to the due process The "privileges and immunities” protected clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as an by the Fourteenth Amendment are those undue deprivation of liberty, it does not that belong to the citizens of the United violate the privileges and immunities clause. States as distinguished from citizens of the The liberty guaranteed by the Fourteenth States—those that arise from the Constitu- Amendment does not confer upon a conscition and laws of the United States as con- entious and religious objector to war and trasted with those that spring from other military training the right to attend a State sources.
university without taking a course in miliIf the refusal by a State to allow its cititary training required by the State as part zen to exercise the privilege of attending the of the curriculum. Hamilton v. Regents State's university, except upon condition (1934), 293 U. S. 245, affirming (Calif. 1934) that he take military training, to which he 28 P. (20) 350. objects religious and conscientious
Due process by States.—Neither Federal It is for the court to determine whether
City, in damming up nonnavigable stream
embankment of railway's right-of-way cross-
Titles I and II of the national prohibition act of October 28, 1919 (41 Stat. 305),
SEO. 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such
SEC. 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President,
Sec. 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any
SEC. 5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October follow-
SEC. 6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as
This amendment was certified by the Secretary of State as valid to all intents and
With reference to section 2, above, public resolution of June 22, 1936 (49 Stat. 1826),
AMENDMENT XXI SECTION 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Sec. 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
SEC. 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
This amendment was certified by the Secretary of State as valid to all intents and purposes as a part of the Constitution on December 5, 1933.
Provision for enforcement of section 2, supra, is made by act of June 25, 1936 (49 Stat. 1928).
JUL 26 1937
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Constitution of the United States..
in military training--
44 45 47 48 53 60 81 86 88 111 114 117 125 129 169 172 199 248 252 254 267 268 273 276
301 307 320 329 334 355 356 382 385 414 421 423 425 427 432