TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Harrison County, Mississippi, Eldon L. Bolton

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, Et Al., Defendants, Eldon L. Bolton Et Al., Defendants-Appellants

United States v. Harrison Cnty., Miss., Eldon L. Bolton, 445 F.2d 276 (5th Cir. 1971)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 24, 1971
Docket
No. 31123
Judges
Coleman, Goldberg, Dyer
Citations
445 F.2d 2761971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9321

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

In United States v. Harrison County, Mississippi, 5 Cir., 1968, 399 F.2d 485 , rehearing denied 5 Cir., 1969, 414 F.2d 784 , this Court directed that a permanent mandatory injunction be issued by the District Court enjoining and requiring the faithful execution of a contract between the Board of Supervisors of Harrison County, Mississippi and the United States dated January 23, 1951, in *277 connection with the construction of a sand beach.

The District Court expeditiously proceeded to execute the mandate of this Court in a eommendably careful and efficient manner. A part of the pre-in-junctive procedure was that all parties in interest were notified that they had ninety days within which to register their objections to the injunctive decree prepared by the Court for final entry in the case. Five parties, corporate and personal, filed objections and, for reasons assigned, sought exemption from the provisions of the proposed injunction. The District Court passed on the objections and none of the parties have appealed except the Bolton interests.

The Boltons sought exemption on the ground that the beach fronting their property at the extreme eastern end of the twenty-six mile long beach constructed under the contract of January 23, 1951, had never been under the bottom of the waters of the Mississippi Sound and was thus not within the decision of this Court.

The petition was verified by an affidavit which asserted that the sand beach in question “was never washed away and never went under water becoming bottoms of the Mississippi Sound. There was a sand beach in existence prior to, and subsequent to January 23, 1951, that was not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. It never washed away and never went under water becoming bottoms of the Mississippi Sound”.

The United States countered these allegations with documentary evidence tending to show that the beach in question had been artificially constructed on the water bottoms of the Mississippi Sound by the United States Engineers, or under their authority and direction, in 1936. This allegation, if true, would defeat the Bolton claim for the reason, as set out in our prior opinion, 399 F.2d at page 491 [citing § 95 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890].

The District Court dismissed the Bolton petition for Exception without making findings of fact or conclusions of law as to whether or not the beach was constructed in 1936 as claimed by the Government or was a natural beach in existence on January 23, 1951, as claimed by the Boltons.

We are of the opinion that the District Court should have heard evidence and resolved these issues and granted or denied the desired Exception as the facts might have warranted.

Without in any manner affecting the remainder of the judgment and decree of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi filed on October 8, 1970, [which, in fact, has become and is now a final judgment] we vacate only that portion of the judgment which disposed of the Bolton claim and we remand that issue to the District Court for its determination consistently with what has been said in this and our prior opinions in this case.

So ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1972: 119722026peak 1972 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Harrison County, Mississippi, Eldon L. Bolton, Jr.463 F.2d 1328 (5th Cir. 1972)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Harrison Cnty., Miss., 399 F.2d 485 (5th Cir. 1968) 22
United States v. Harrison Cnty., Miss., 414 F.2d 784 (5th Cir. 1969) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list