Rogers v. Brooks

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “it is the issuance of the NITU, and not some later or earlier action in the nature of physical possession, that is the governmental act which blocks the state reversion property interest and thereby effectuates the takings”
• “In Preseault II, the Federal Circuit held that whether an abandonment has occurred is a question of ‘fact, and the fact that question relates to a right of way taken by a railroad company does not make it one of law.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).