Bedford v. United States
Citations
- 192 U.S. 217
- 24 S. Ct. 238
- 48 L. Ed. 414
- 1904 U.S. LEXIS 1005
Syllabus
<p>Damages to land by flooding as the result of, revetments erected by the United States along the banks of the Mississippi River to prevent erosion of the banks from natural causes are consequential and do not constitute a taking of the lands' flooded within the meaning .of the Fifth Amendment to the Federal Constitution. Gibson v. United States, 166 U. S. 269, followed; United States v. Injnah, 188 U. S. 445, distinguished.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- distinguishing between damage to property and a taking of property
- damages to lands by flooding as the result of revetments erected by the United States along the banks of the Mississippi River to prevent erosion of the banks from natural causes are consequential and do not constitute a taking of the land flooded within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment
- damages to lands by flooding as the result of revetments erected by the United States along the banks of the Mississippi River to prevent erosion of the banks from natural causes are consequential and do not constitute a taking of the land flooded within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McKenna
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
100 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court· 1982-06-30· cited 1,570×
- Philadelphia Co. v. StimsonSupreme Court· 1912-03-04· cited 450×
- United States v. CressSupreme Court· 1917-03-12· cited 427×
- Danforth v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1939-12-04· cited 362×
- Manigault v. SpringsSupreme Court· 1905-12-04· cited 336×
- Peterman v. Department of Natural ResourcesMichigan Supreme Court· 1994-08-23· cited 247×
- Brazos River Authority v. City of GrahamTexas Supreme Court· 1961-10-03· cited 217×
- United States v. Willow River Power Co.Supreme Court· 1945-05-07· cited 207×
- Sanguinetti v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1924-02-18· cited 167×
- United States v. MeyerSeventh Circuit· 1940-06-12· cited 119×
- William Eugene Owen, as of the Estate of Caroline Pearson Payne v. The United StatesFederal Circuit· 1988-07-18· cited 113×
- Barnes v. United StatesCourt of Claims· 1976-07-09· cited 110×
- National Mfg. Co. v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1954-02-08· cited 90×
- Skip Kirchdorfer, Inc. v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 1993-12-10· cited 81×
- Jackson v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1913-06-16· cited 80×
- Conger v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1921-05-28· cited 75×
- John Horstmann Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1921-11-21· cited 68×
- Burkhardt v. United StatesCourt of Claims· 1949-06-06· cited 66×
- Peabody v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1913-12-15· cited 62×
- Smith v. New England Aircraft Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1930-03-04· cited 61×
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
Other cases named Bedford v. United States
5 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.