United States v. Gertzen Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “Plaintiffs continue to have access to their property for the principal purpose for which it is used. The fact that traffic has to use a more circuitous route * * * may be inconvenient, affecting the use, but it does not rise to the constitutional magnitude requiring compensation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).