TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Kincaid

United States v. Kincaid, 49 F.2d 768 (5th Cir. 1931)
Download
Format
Include

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

Subsequent history: rev'd sub nom. Hurley v. Kincaid, 285 U.S. 95 (1932). (read from the later opinion; check before relying)

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
May 15, 1931
Docket
No. 5928
Citations
49 F.2d 7681931 U.S. App. LEXIS 3264

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree rendered in a suit brought by the appellee, the owner of a tract of improved land, located in the Boeuf River Basin, in Louisiana, which, by the execution of the plan for the control of flood waters of the Mississippi river adopted pursuant to provisions of the Flood Control Act, approved May 15, 1928 (33 USCA § 702a et seq.), would be subject to be flooded by a greater volume of water than ever before. That decree awarded in favor of the appellee an injunction restraining the Secretary of War, the Chief of Engineers, the Mississippi River Commission, the District Engineer, and their agents, servants, etc., from proceeding with the construction authorized by, or carrying out the plan adopted by or pursuant to, that act, §§ 1, 4 (33 USCA §§ 702a, 702d), in the Boeuf River Basin flood-way, including all levee work or levee construction and the awarding or letting of contracts for the same, unless and until the said property of the appellee shall be acquired by the United States government, or the flowage rights over the same shall be acquired by purchase or condemnation for such purpose.

*769 For reasons stated, in opinions rendered by the District Judge [Kincaid v. United States, 35 F.(2d) 235 ; Id. 37 F.(2d) 602 ], we conclude that appellee was entitled to the relief granted by that decree. The record showing no reversible error, that decree is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1933: 11937: 11939: 11948: 11961: 11974: 11982: 119332026peak 1933 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Penn Central Transportation Company384 F. Supp. 895 (Regl. Rail Reorg. Act 1974)
  2. County of Kane v. Elmhurst National Bank443 N.E.2d 1149 (Ill. App. Ct. 1982)
  3. Gerlach Livestock Co. v. United States76 F. Supp. 87 (Ct. Cl. 1948)
  4. Sponenbarger v. United States101 F.2d 506 (8th Cir. 1939)
  5. United States v. Yazoo & M. V. R.4 F. Supp. 366 (E.D. La. 1933)
  6. Sponenbarger v. United States21 F. Supp. 28 (E.D. Ark. 1937)

Most recent

  1. County of Kane v. Elmhurst National Bank443 N.E.2d 1149 (Ill. App. Ct. 1982)
  2. In re Penn Central Transportation Company384 F. Supp. 895 (Regl. Rail Reorg. Act 1974)
  3. Board of Commissioners v. St. Landry Parish School Board130 So. 2d 692 (La. Ct. App. 1961)
  4. Gerlach Livestock Co. v. United States76 F. Supp. 87 (Ct. Cl. 1948)
  5. Sponenbarger v. United States101 F.2d 506 (8th Cir. 1939)
  6. Sponenbarger v. United States21 F. Supp. 28 (E.D. Ark. 1937)

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
Kincaid v. United States, 35 F.2d 235 (W.D. La. 1929) 6
Kincaid v. United States, 37 F.2d 602 (W.D. La. 1929) 8

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