Citation network
Dohany Vs. Rogers
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 14, 1930
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 362 (1930) U.S. Supreme Court Dohany v. RogersSearch
-
U.S. 362 (1930) Dohany v. RogersSearch
-
involved lands taken for the same project under the same contract and by like procedure. Fitzsimons & Galvin, Inc. v. RogersSearch
-
Johnstone v. DetroitSearch
-
Ry. Co., 245 Mich. 65. Accepting this interpretation of the local law by the highest court of the state, Rindge Co. v. LosSearch
-
purpose of exchange with the railway company is for a private, and not a public, purpose ( see Missouri Pacific Ry. v. NebraskaSearch
-
is so essentially a part of the project for improving a public highway as to be for a public use. See Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Pitznogle v. WesternSearch
-
Rogers v. BradshawSearch
-
Joslin Mfg. Co. v. CitySearch
-
Rindge Co. v. LosSearch
-
since it only permits deduction of benefits derived from the construction of a highway. Fitzsimons & Galvin, Inc. v. RogersSearch
-
See Johnstone et al. v. PageSearch
-
by the Highway Act or embraced within just compensation are conferred upon him by constitutional guaranties. See McCoy v. UnionSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
fees and expenses are not embraced within just compensation for land taken by eminent domain. See Joslin Mfg. Co. v. CitySearch
-
the recovery of an attorney's fee in special classes of proceedings while withholding them in others. Sioux County v. NationalSearch
-
C. & N.W. Ry. Co. v. NyeSearch
-
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. v. CadeSearch
-
Ins. Co. v. DobneySearch
-
it may classify those whose property is taken and allow the one class expenses not granted to another. Joslin Mfg. Co. v. CitySearch
-
regard being had to the nature of the proceeding and the character of the rights which may be affected by it. Reetz v. MichiganSearch
-
Hurwitz v. NorthSearch
-
Backus v. UnionSearch
-
it a different procedure from that prescribed for the exercise of eminent domain by a private corporation. See Backus v. UnionSearch
-
for that purpose to an announcement in open court, three judges sitting. See Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. LouisianaSearch
-
owner for what his landed interest will suffer from the use proposed to be made of it by the railroad company.' Barnes v. RailwaySearch
-
or the amount to which the value of the property from which it is taken is depreciated. Grand Rapids, etc., R. Co. v. HeiselSearch
-
of way, and, in the absence of an express statutory provision, such a deduction cannot be made. Detroit, etc., R. Co. v. NationalSearch
-
State Highway Commissioner v. BreisacherSearch
-
Per North, J., Fitzsimons & Galvin, Inc. v. RogersSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Dohany v. RogersSearch
-
Fitzsimons & Galvin, Inc. v. RogersSearch
-
Missouri Pacific Ry. v. NebraskaSearch
-
See Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
See McCoy v. UnionSearch
-
See Joslin Mfg. Co. v. CitySearch
-
Sioux County v. NationalSearch
-
Ins. Co. v. DobneySearch
-
Reetz v. MichiganSearch
-
See Backus v. UnionSearch
-
See Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. LouisianaSearch
-
Barnes v. RailwaySearch
-
R. Co. v. HeiselSearch
-
R. Co. v. NationalSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial