West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. United States
Decision Date | 10 November 1952 |
Docket Number | No. 6439.,6439. |
Citation | 200 F.2d 100 |
Parties | WEST VIRGINIA PULP & PAPER CO. v. UNITED STATES. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Charles W. Waring, Charleston, S. C. (Waring & Brockinton, Charleston, S. C., on brief), for appellant.
Ben Scott Whaley, U. S. Atty., Charleston, S. C. (James M. McInerney, Asst. Atty. Gen., James B. Heyward, Sp. Asst. to U. S. Atty., Charleston, S. C., Roger P. Marquis and S. Billingsley Hill, Attorneys, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., on brief), for appellee.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal by a land owner from a judgment fixing compensation in a condemnation proceeding. The property involved is 44 acres of land belonging to the West Virginia Pulp & Paper Company which was taken to provide a site for storage of gasoline for the Air Force. It is a part of a 154 acre tract acquired by the company in 1936 and combined with adjacent tracts into one of approximately 413 acres, which was being held as a site for a pulp dissolving mill that the company was preparing to build near its plant on the Cooper River above Charleston, S. C. The jury fixed the value of the 44 acres condemned, together with all damages incident to the taking thereof, at $44,000; and, from judgment in accordance with the verdict, the company has appealed.
The 44 acres was taken, as stated, to provide storage for gasoline, and the company proposed to show that following its taking the government constructed thereon large storage tanks with a capacity of 80,000 barrels each and an over-all capacity of 23,500,000 gallons. It further proposed to show that the hazards incident to this use of the property taken greatly depreciated the value of the remainder of the tract for industrial purposes. The trial judge excluded this evidence and refused to instruct the jury that it might include this depreciation in its award of damages. In this we think there was error. It is well settled that "Whenever there has been an actual physical taking of a part of a distinct tract of land, the compensation to be awarded includes not only the market value of that part of the tract appropriated, but the damage to the remainder resulting from that taking, embracing, of course, injury due to the use to which the part appropriated is to be devoted". United States v. Grizzard, 219 U.S. 180, 31 S.Ct. 162, 163, 55 L.Ed. 165; Bauman v. Ross, 167 U.S. 548, 17 S.Ct. 966, 42 L.Ed. 270; United States v. Dickinson, 4 Cir., 152 F.2d 865, affirmed 331 U.S. 745, 67 S.Ct. 1382, 91 L.Ed. 1789; Raleigh, etc., R. Co. v. Mecklenburg Mfg. Co., 169 N.C. 156, 85 S.E. 390, L.R.A. 1916A, 1090; 18 Am.Jur. pp. 905-909.
In Sharp v. United States, 191 U.S. 341, 24 S.Ct. 114, 116, 48 L.Ed. 211, where an entire tract of land was taken, it was held that there might be no recovery on account of depreciation in the value of other lands of the owner resulting from the taking, but the court was at pains to distinguish that case from one where there was damage to the remainder of a tract from the use made of the part taken, and in the course of its opinion used the following language:
The case here is to be distinguished from such cases as Campbell v. United States, 266 U.S. 368, 45 S.Ct. 115, 69 L.Ed. 328, and Richards v. Washington Terminal Co., 233 U.S. 546, 34 S.Ct. 654, 58 L.Ed. 1088, which hold that there can be no award of compensation on account of use of lands taken from others. In this case, however,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Pleasant Hill v. First Baptist Church
...taken, not any special damage it may have suffered through frustraction of its plans. (Citations.)' (West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. United States (4th Cir. 1952) 200 F.2d 100, 104.) Evidence was clearly admissible under the third concept because if the property had lost its utility for g......
-
Miller v. United States
...damages relative thereto, see United States v. Grizzard, 219 U.S. 180, 31 S.Ct. 162, 55 L.Ed. 165 (1911); West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. United States, 200 F.2d 100 (4th Cir. 1952); but see United States v. Buhler, 305 F.2d 319, 329 (5th Cir. 1962), this record will not support a conclus......
-
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States
...191 U.S. at 354, 24 S.Ct. at 117; United States v. Grizzard, supra, 219 U.S. at 183, 31 S.Ct. at 163; West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. United States, 200 F.2d 100, 103-04 (4th Cir. 1952). Plaintiff's experts, as indicated previously, believed that use of the taken land as a park would serv......
-
U.S. v. Certain Land Situated in City of Detroit, 79-CV-73934-DT.
...the issue of unity or separateness of tracts is a question of fact to be presented to the trier of fact"); West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. v. United States, 200 F.2d 100 (4th Cir.1952) (relied upon by DIBCO in its "Supplemental Authority on the Question of Partial Taking and the Damages Awar......