Willink v. United States
Citations
- 240 U.S. 572
- 36 S. Ct. 422
- 60 L. Ed. 808
- 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1484
Syllabus
<p>The mere location by the Secretary of War of a harbor line does not amount to a taking of property within the line or its appropriation to public use; nor does a taking result from the request of an officer of the United States to a riparian'owner to vacate if such request is neither acceded to nor enforced.</p> <p>The fact that the Government makes a contract to cut away land within a harbor line location does not amount to a taking of 'such land if there was no attempt to perform the contract.</p> <p>Whatever rights a riparian owner may haye in land below mean high-water line of a navigable and tidal river, they are subordinate to ■ the public right of navigation and the power of Congress to employ all appropriate means to keep the river open and navigation unobstructed.</p> <p>Congress may prevent renewal of existing obstructions below mean high water, if navigation may be injuriously affected thereby, and the owner is not entitled to compensation therefor.</p> <p>In this case, a riparian owner on the Savannah River was held not to be entitled to -recover as upon an implied contract for taking his property by reason of damages alleged to have been'' sustained by him in consequence of the exercise of the power of-Congress over nayigable waters.</p> <p>38 Ct. Cl. 693; 49 Ct. Cl. 701, affirmed.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- rights possessed in land below the mean high water line were subordinate to the public right of navigation
- rights possessed in land below the mean high water line were subordinate to the public right of navigation
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Van Devanter, McReynolds
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
34 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co.Supreme Court· 1941-01-20· cited 448×
- United States v. CressSupreme Court· 1917-03-12· cited 427×
- Danforth v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1939-12-04· cited 362×
- United States v. Willow River Power Co.Supreme Court· 1945-05-07· cited 207×
- United States v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court· 1941-04-28· cited 161×
- United States v. Kansas City Life InsuranceSupreme Court· 1950-06-05· cited 151×
- United States v. SponenbargerSupreme Court· 1939-12-04· cited 149×
- United States v. MeyerSeventh Circuit· 1940-06-12· cited 119×
- New Jersey v. SargentSupreme Court· 1926-01-04· cited 95×
- Burkhardt v. United StatesCourt of Claims· 1949-06-06· cited 66×
- Leslie Salt Co. v. FroehlkeNinth Circuit· 1978-05-11· cited 64×
- Osborne v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1944-11-24· cited 46×
- Rank v. KrugS.D. California· 1950-04-13· cited 43×
- Grant M. Acton v. United States v. W. Clifton v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1969-03-03· cited 38×
- Franklin v. United StatesSixth Circuit· 1939-01-20· cited 23×
- Klamath and Modoc Tribes and Yahooskin Band of Indians v. The United States. Elva G. Anderson v. The United StatesCourt of Claims· 1971-01-22· cited 21×
- Miramar Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court· 1943-11-03· cited 19×
- Goodman v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1940-08-06· cited 15×
- Early v. South Carolina Public Service AuthoritySupreme Court of South Carolina· 1955-10-31· cited 12×
- Allen Gun Club v. United StatesCourt of Claims· 1967-06-09· cited 10×
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Philadelphia Co. v. StimsonSupreme Court· 1912-03-04· cited 450×
- United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co.Supreme Court· 1913-05-26· cited 448×
- Scranton v. WheelerSupreme Court· 1900-12-03· cited 248×
- Gibson v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1897-03-22· cited 230×
- Bedford v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1904-01-18· cited 139×
- Greenleaf Johnson Lumber Co. v. GarrisonSupreme Court· 1915-04-12· cited 97×
- Lewis Blue Point Oyster Cultivation Co. v. BriggsSupreme Court· 1913-05-26· cited 89×
- Prosser v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court· 1894-03-05· cited 15×
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.