U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1960

Mamer v. District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided June 30, 1960

284 F.2d 221 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Ralph A. Ricketts, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Robert H. McNeill, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant., Mr. S. Billingsley Hill, Atty., Dept, of Justice, with whom Messrs. Roger P. Marquis and Robert R. MacLeod, Attys., Dept, of Justice, were on the brief, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Louisan Mamer, in Re Parcel 2557 v. District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency (D.C. Cir. 1960)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Appellant owned property which was-condemned under an urban redevelopment plan.1 In her complaint in the District Court she alleged that the action of the Land Agency was arbitrary and capricious, in that the purpose for which her property was seized was not a public-purpose and the taking was therefore-illegal. The District Court gave summary judgment for the Government on. this point, upon the authority of Berman *222v. Parker2 and Donnelly v. District of Columbia Redevel. Land Agency.3 We think the District Court was correct in the matter.

Appellant also complains of rulings of the trial court upon questions of evidence and complains concerning the amount of the verdict in view of the evidence. We find no error.

Affirmed.

. 348 U.S. 26, 75 S.Ct. 98, 99 L.Ed. 27 (1954).

. 106 U.S.App.D.C. 99, 269 F.2d 546 (D.C.Cir. 1959), certiorari denied 361 U.S. 949, 80 S.Ct. 402, 4 L.Ed.2d 381 (1960).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.