United States v. 6.321 Acres of Land, Etc., Suffolk County, 73-1033.
Decision Date | 30 May 1973 |
Docket Number | No. 73-1033.,73-1033. |
Citation | 479 F.2d 404 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. 6.321 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS Situated IN SUFFOLK COUNTY et al., Defendants, Appellees, City of Boston, Defendant, Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit |
Mack K. Greenberg, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Boston, Mass., with whom Herbert P. Gleason, Corp. Counsel, Boston, Mass., was on brief for appellant.
Jacques B. Gelin, Atty., Dept. of Justice, with whom Kent Frizzell, Asst. Atty. Gen., James N. Gabriel, U. S. Atty., Edmund B. Clark, and Peter H. Ruvolo, Attys., Dept. of Justice, were on brief, for appellee.
Before COFFIN, Chief Judge, McENTEE and CAMPBELL, Circuit Judges.
This appeal arises from a suit by the United States to condemn certain property located in the City of Boston for use as an addition to an existing postal facility. In April 1966 the Post Office Department notified the City of Boston that it planned to expand the South Boston Postal Annex through the medium of a lease-construction arrangement. Under this plan the proposed addition was to be built and owned by private parties and then leased to the Department, thus remaining subject to local taxation. In September of that year the Department filed an application for a building permit for this project which was denied when a number of potential zoning violations became apparent. This denial was appealed, however, and in March 1967, upon further assurances to the city that the proposed structure would remain on the tax rolls, the necessary variances to the zoning law were granted. Thereafter, the parcel in question was conveyed by the government to private developers, construction proceeded for four years, and, on December 7, 1971, the addition was leased to the Postal Service for a term of thirty years with certain options for renewal for substantial periods of time.
Some two weeks later, however, in an abrupt change of policy, the Postal Service filed a "Declaration of Taking" with reference to this property and, on December 30, 1971, filed the instant condemnation suit in which the City of Boston and all other parties thought to have an interest in this property were joined as defendants. After the value of the interests of all the other claimants had been agreed upon, the United States moved to dismiss the city as a party. Upon hearing, the district court granted this motion finding that the city had not demonstrated ownership of any compensable interest in the property and, to the extent that the city sought to recover for breach of an alleged agreement with the Postal Service, that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain this claim in this proceeding.1 This appeal followed.
The initial issue which must be examined on appeal is the nature of appellant's interest in the condemned property. In this regard the city first argues that the Postal Service's promise, allegedly made in exchange for the approval of the building permit, that this facility would remain on the tax rolls for at least thirty years afforded it "a special and unique interest in the property" which is compensable within the meaning of the fifth amendment. In the alternative, the city contends that an agreement between itself and the Postal Service arose out of the circumstances detailed above and that it is entitled to compensation because this agreement was appropriated in this proceeding. We find neither of these contentions persuasive.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. v. 101.88 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situated in St. Mary Parish, State of La.
...e. g., United States v. 40.60 Acres in Contra Costa County, California, 9 Cir. 1973, 483 F.2d 927; United States v. 6.321 Acres in Suffolk County, Massachusetts, 1 Cir. 1973, 479 F.2d 404. None of the cases relied on by Avoca, indeed none of the cases extant, is to the contrary. The cases A......
-
Navarro v. United States, Civ. A. No. 27/1980.
...requesting damages in excess of the upper $10,000 limit are to be brought exclusively in the Court of Claims. United States v. 6.321 Acres of Land, 479 F.2d 404 (1st Cir.1973); United States v. Tacoma Oriental S.S. Co., 86 F.2d 363 (9th Cir.1936); Martin v. Block, 571 F.Supp. 1180 (D.V.I. 1......
-
Navarro v. Farmers Home Admin., Civil No. 27/1980
...requesting damages in excess of the upper $10,000 limit are to be brought exclusively in the Court of Claims. United States v. 6.321 Acres of Land, 479 F.2d 404 (1st Cir. 1973); United States v. Tacoma Oriental S.S. Co., 86 F.2d 363 (9th Cir. 1936); Martin v. Block, 571 F.Supp. 1180 (D.V.I.......
- Equitrans, L.P. v. 0.56 Acres More or Less of Permanent Easement Located in Marion Cnty.