· 3/12/1917

United States v. Cress

Citations

243 U.S. 316
37 S. Ct. 380
61 L. Ed. 746
1917 U.S. LEXIS 2074

Syllabus

The servitude to the interests of navigation of privately owned lands forming the banks and bed of a stream is a natural servitude, confined to such streams as in their ordinary and natural condition are susceptible of valuable public use in navigation, and confined to the natural condition of such streams. When navigable streams affording ways of commerce between States are improved by the federal government by means of locks and dams which raise the water above its natural level, the streams as thus improved remain navigable waters of the United States for all purposes of federal jurisdiction and regulation. The power of the federal government to improve navigable streams in the interest of interstate and foreign commerce must be exercised, when private property is taken, in subordination to the Fifth Amendment. In improving the navigation of the Cumberland River, in Kentuekjq under the commerce power, the federal government by means of a lock and dam raised the water above the natural level so that lands on a non-navigable tributary, not normally invaded thereby, were subjected permanently to periodical overflows substantially injuring, though not destroying, their value. Held, in an action for damages under § 24 of the Judicial Code (derived from the Tucker Act): (1) That this amounted to a partial taking of the property. (2) That the United States was liable ex contractu to compensate the owner to the extent of the injury. (3) That, upon payment, the United States would acquire an easement to overflow the land as often as would necessarily result from the use of the lock and dam for navigation, the fee, however, remaining in the private owner. (4) That the riparian owner also was entitled to compensation for,impairment of the value of his land caused by the destruction of a ford over the tributary used in connection with a private way appurtenant to the land. A like improvement of the Kentucky River, in

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the occupation of land by permanent backwater overflow 3 due to the government’s damming of a river was an unconstitutional taking
noting that the government may effect a taking via “intermittent but inevitably recurring overflows” no less than by permanently inundating the land by water
noting that “when less than the whole has been taken” the scope of the taking should be defined in terms of what “is necessary fairly to effectuate the purpose of the taking”
affirming lower court ruling that erection of a lock and dam to “canalize” a river required the government to compensate private landowner for frequent overflows
“That overflowing lands by permanent backwater is a direct invasion, amounting to a taking, is settled-”
the government’s construction of a lock and dam subjected the plaintiff’s land to intermittent flooding

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pitney, McReynolds

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.