Bothwell v. United States, 78

Decision Date06 December 1920
Docket NumberNo. 78,78
Citation254 U.S. 231,41 S.Ct. 74,65 L.Ed. 238
PartiesBOTHWELL et al. v. UNITED STATES
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Mr. Charles H. Merillat, of Washington, D. C., for appellants.

Mr. Assistant Attorney General Davis, for the United States.

Mr. Justice McREYNOLDSdelivered the opinion of the Court.

Appellants owned and utilized in their business of stock raising a large tract of land lying in Sweetwater Valley, Wyo.In June, 1909, much hay was stored upon the land and a thousand head of cattle were there confined.Under the Reclamation Act of June 17, 1902(32 Stat. 389, c. 1093, § 7[Comp. St. § 4706]), the United States constructed the Pathfinder Dam.This arrested the flood waters and caused inundation of appellants' lands.The hay was destroyed, and it became necessary to remove the animals and sell them at prices below their fair value.

Proceedings to condemn the land were instituted by the appellee, in the United States Circuit Court for Wyoming before the overflow.It is said the right to enter was not acquired until thereafter.The value of the land was ascertained and paid, but the court denied appellants' claim for the hay, and for loss consequent upon forced sale of the cattle and destruction of the business.No appeal was taken.The present suit was instituted to recover for the items so disallowed.The court below gave judgment for value of the hay only, and the cause is here upon claimants' appeal.

Certainly appellants' position in respect of the items in question is no better than it would have been if no condemnation proceedings had been instituted.In the circumstances supposed there might have been a recovery 'for what actually has been taken, upon the principle that the government by the very act of taking impliedly has promised to make compensation because the dictates of justice and the terms of the Fifth Amendment so require.'United...

To continue reading

Request your trial

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex
49 cases
  • United States Tennessee Valley Authority v. Powelson
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 17 May 1943
    ...'rested primarily upon the doctrine of estoppel, as this Court has in several cases since pointed out.' 13 See Bothwell v. United States, 254 U.S. 231, 41 S.Ct. 74, 65 L.Ed. 238; Joslin Co. v. Providence, 262 U.S. 668, 675, 43 S.Ct. 684, 688, 67 L.Ed. 1167; Atwater & Co. v. United States, 2......
  • United States v. John Felin Co
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 14 June 1948
    ...to destruction has been regarded as infliction of consequential injuries and thus as not compensable, cf. e.g., Bothwell v. United States, 254 U.S. 231, 41 S.Ct. 74, 65 L.Ed. 238; Mitchell v. United States, 267 U.S. 341, 45 S.Ct. 293, 69 L.Ed. 2 67 F.Supp. 1017, 107 Ct.Cl. 155, 165. For thi......
  • Tektronix, Inc. v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Claims Court
    • 23 March 1977
    ...Tr. 3843-3844. 2 See United States ex rel. T.V.A. v. Powelson, 319 U.S. 266, 63 S.Ct. 1047, 87 L.Ed. 1390 (1943); Bothwell v. United States, 254 U.S. 231 (1920). See also Omnia Commercial Co. v. United States, 261 U.S. 502, 43 S.Ct. 437, 67 L.Ed. 773 (1923); Price Fire & Water Proofing Co. ......
  • Smith v. New England Aircraft Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 4 March 1930
    ...U. S. 217, 24 S. Ct. 238, 48 L. Ed. 414;Jackson v. United States, 230 U. S. 1, 33 S. Ct. 1011, 57 L. Ed. 1363;Bothwell v. United States, 254 U. S. 231, 41 S. Ct. 74, 65 L. Ed. 238; and Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Co. v. United States, 260 U. S. 125, 43 S. Ct. 37, 67 L. Ed. 165, where the Feder......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Takings, trade secrets, and tobacco: mountain or molehill?
    • United States
    • Stanford Law Review Vol. 53 No. 2, November - November 2000
    • 1 November 2000
    ...of property is a taking "per se"). (46.) See, e.g., United States v. Dickinson, 331 U.S. 745, 750-51 (1947); Bothwell v. United States, 254 U.S. 231 (1920); United States v. Lynah, 188 U.S. 445, 468-70 (1903); see also Richards v. Washington Terminal Co., 233 U.S. 546, 557 (1914) (finding a......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT