Supreme Court of the United States, 1919

Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided May 19, 1919 · The Chief Justice

250 U.S. 1; 39 S. Ct. 399; 63 L. Ed. 809; 1919 U.S. LEXIS 1704 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. John Lowell, with whom Mr. Frank W. Hackett was on the brief, for appellants., Mr. Assistant Attorney General Brown, with whom Mr. Charles H. Weston was on the brief, for the United States.

Cases that cite this one

24 later published cases cite this decision.

Benson v. State (S.D. 2006)
Gerlach Livestock Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1948)
North Counties Hydro-Electric Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1947)
Causby v. United States (Court of Claims 1945)
United States v. Yazoo & M. V. R. (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1933)
State Ex Rel. Coffey v. DISTRICT COURT OF OKL. CTY. (Okla. 1976)
State ex rel. Coffey v. District Court of Oklahoma County (Okla. 1976)
Cravens v. United States (United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas 1958)
North Counties Hydro-Electric Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1957)
Harris v. United States. Thomas v. United States. Ellis v. United States (10th Cir. 1953)
Causby v. United States (Court of Claims 1948)
Garrett v. Jones (Okla. 1948)
State Ex Rel. Board of County Commissioners v. Bruce (Mont. 1937)
Sponenbarger v. United States (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas 1937)
Swetland v. Curtiss Airports Corporation (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1930)
Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1922)
Gerlach Live Stock Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1948)
Portsmouth Harbor Land & Hotel Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1928)
Orr v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2023)
North Counties Hydro-Electric Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1965)
United States Ex Rel. Jordan v. Ickes (D.C. Cir. 1944)
Matthews v. United States (Court of Claims 1938)
Hurley v. Kincaid (Supreme Court of the United States 1932)
Booth & Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1926)

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

Memorandum opinion by

The Chief Justice.

Recovery was sought in the court below from the United States for property taken by it as the result of the alleged firing of guns in a fortification-on the coast of Maine and the passing of the projectiles oyer and across *2 a portion of the land alleged to have been taken. The court finding that a former case by it decided against the owners and here affirmed (Peabody v. United States, 231 U. S. 530), for taking of the same land resulting from instances of gun fire resulting from the same fort and guns, was identical with this, except for some occasional subsequent acts of gun fire, held that case to be conclusive of this and rejected the claim on the merits.

Coming to consider this action of the court in the light of the findings by it made, we are constrained to the con-, elusion that it was right and that no possible difference exists between this and the Peabody Case. Before applying this conclusion we say that we find that the record discloses no ground for the applications here made to remand and for additional findings.

Judgment affirmed.

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