Citation network
Olson Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 30, 1934
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
-
Olson v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 292 U.S. 246 (1934) U.S. Supreme Court Olson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 292 U.S. 246 (1934) Olson v. UnitedSearch
-
elements arising from the prospect of the Government's acquiring the flowage rights was properly rejected. Boom Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
of the sovereign power of eminent domain is always a matter of importance, for, as said in Monongahela Navigation Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
the constitutional safeguard against the uncompensated taking or use of private property for public purposes. Reagan v. Farmers'Search
-
is the market value of the property at the time of the taking, contemporaneously paid in money. Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. UnitedSearch
-
Jacobs v. UnitedSearch
-
not by any means confiscate the benefits, or be required to bear the burden, of the owner's bargain. Vogelstein & Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
that the prospect of demand for such use affects the market value while the property is privately held. Boom Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
Clark's Ferry Bridge Co. v. PageSearch
-
or is being acquired by eminent domain negative consideration of availability for use in the public service. New York v. SageSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
probable demand by prospective purchasers or condemnors affects market value, it is to be taken into account. Boom Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
parcels for public use is not the measure of or a guide to the compensation to which the owner is entitled. New York v. SageSearch
-
United States v. Chandler-DunbarSearch
-
Shoemaker v. UnitedSearch
-
Kerr v. SouthSearch
-
Union Electric Light & Power Co. v. SnyderSearch
-
an extent as to establish prevailing prices at or as of the time of the expropriation. As that measure ( United States v. NewSearch
-
fairly might be brought forward and reasonably be given substantial weight in such bargaining. Brooks-Scanlon Corp. v. UnitedSearch
-
Smith v. IllinoisSearch
-
Los Angeles Gas Co. v. RailroadSearch
-
Comm'n, 289 U. S. 287 , 289 U. S. 319 . Petitioners rely on Boom Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
of errors or in the reasons given in the petition for this writ. The contention is not properly before us. Gunning v. CooleySearch
-
Together with No. 581, Karlson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, and No. 582, Brewter v. UnitedSearch
-
Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. ChicagoSearch
-
McGovern v. NewSearch
-
Vogelstein & Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. NewSearch
-
Mitchell v. UnitedSearch
-
Murhard Estate Co. v. PortlandSearch
-
Weiser Valley Land & Water Co. v. RyanSearch
-
Denver & R.G. R. Co. v. MillsSearch
-
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. NorthSearch
-
North American Telegraph Co. v. NorthernSearch
-
United States v. BostonSearch
-
Ford Hydro-Electric Co. v. NeelySearch
-
Guste v. UnitedSearch
-
Fales v. EasthamptonSearch
-
Smith v. CommonwealthSearch
-
North Shore R. Co. v. PennaSearch
-
Rock Island & Peoria Ry. Co. v. LeisySearch
-
Currie v. WaverlySearch
-
Conan v. CitySearch
-
Santa Ana v. HarlinSearch
-
Alloway v. NashvilleSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial