United States v. Certain Land in Centerline, 15792.
| Decision Date | 22 October 1942 |
| Docket Number | No. 15792.,15792. |
| Citation | 47 F. Supp. 320 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. CERTAIN LAND IN CENTERLINE et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan |
John C. Lehr, John W. Babcock, and Julius Kabatsky, all of Detroit, Mich., for the Government.
Devine, Kent & Devine, of Detroit, Mich., for respondents Minnie and Harold Bousson.
Douglas W. Ball, of Mt. Clemens, Mich., and Guy L. Frost, Centerline, Mich., for respondent administrator of Clarence Bousson Estate.
On July 26, 1941, the Government instituted this proceeding to condemn certain land in Centerline, Michigan, for a defense housing project. Following the procedure outlined by 40 U.S.C.A. § 258a et seq., the Government filed a declaration of taking with the condemnation petition, which declaration showed the estimate of just compensation for the land taken to be $55,771.75. This sum was deposited with the clerk of the court. Immediately thereafter a judgment was entered, finding that the proceedings were regular, that such estimated just compensation had been deposited, that title vested in the Government, that "the right to just compensation for the property so taken is vested in the persons entitled thereto, and the amount of such just compensation shall be ascertained and awarded in this proceeding and established by judgment herein pursuant to law", ordering possession surrendered August 1, 1941, and further ordering the case held open for such further and other orders, judgments and decrees as might be necessary. It appears from the record that Minnie and Harold Bousson have an interest in the land. On September 10, 1941, an order was entered with the consent of the Government, providing for partial disbursement of $23,314.30 for Minnie and Harold Bousson, $13,314.30 of which was to be paid to the State of Michigan in execution of a land contract under which they had purchased the property as tax reverted lands a few months previously by matching the highest bid therefor at public auction.
On December 29, 1941, the Government filed a document entitled "Amendment of Declaration of Taking." The preamble of this document stated: "The estimate of just compensation contained in the declaration of taking was made in error and by mistake", and the document ended with a declaration that, "the sum of money estimated by me to be just compensation for said land, at the time of the taking thereof, is $31,835.00."
On January 29, 1942, Minnie and Harold Bousson filed a petition, praying that the deposit of $55,771.75 be paid forthwith to them as compensation for the land taken without prejudice to their right "to prove at the trial of this cause, should this petition be denied, the true, correct and rightful value of the property so taken and condemned." This petition was not noticed for hearing. On March 21, 1942, the Government filed a motion, noticed for hearing coincident with hearing on the last-described Bousson petition, asking for an order directing the clerk to refund to the Government the difference between the original deposit and the estimated amount of just compensation set forth in the amended declaration, namely, $23,936.75.
Subsequently, the Administrator of the estate of Clarence Bousson, deceased, intervened and filed a petition claiming part ownership in the land contract with the State of Michigan, and petitioned the court for a partial payment of $5,000 pending further proceedings herein.
These two petitions for disbursement and the petition for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. 1,997.66 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, ETC.
...the power to allow the original compensation estimate to be amended and the deposit excess to be withdrawn. United States v. Certain Land in Centerline, D.C.E.D.Mich., 47 F.Supp. 320. Other district courts, implicationally at least, have pointed to an opposite conclusion. United States v. 2......
-
United States v. 44.00 ACRES OF LAND, ETC., 287
...prejudice the land owner. United States v. 1,997.66 Acres of Land, More or Less, etc., 8 Cir., 137 F.2d 8; United States v. Certain Land in Centerline, D.C.E.D.Mich., 47 F.Supp. 320. Before granting the motion to vacate the Declaration, the court was well aware of the fact that the Governme......
-
United States v. Certain Interests in Property, Civ. No. 1952.
...prejudice the land owner. United States v. 1,997.66 Acres of Land, More or Less, etc., 8 Cir., 137 F.2d 8; United States v. Certain Land in Centerline, D.C.E.D.Mich., 47 F.Supp. 320. Before granting the motion to vacate the Declaration, the court was well aware of the fact that the Governme......
-
US v. 76.208 Acres of Land, More or Less, Civ. A. No. 82-3203.
...See United States v. 1,997.66 Acres, More or Less, in Polk County, Iowa, 137 F.2d 8 (8th Cir.1943); United States v. Certain Land in Centerline, 47 F.Supp. 320 (E.D.Mich.1942). In this case the United States asserts that the omission of the words "agricultural or" was inadvertent. In suppor......