Dougherty v. Haaland
Dougherty v. Haaland, 444 U.S. 992 (1979)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 7 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(Virginia riparian owner not entitled to damages for diminished value because of pollution of water by municipality)
-
(unattractive use to which city put James River may have detrimental effect on value of property along shore but does not constitute due process violation)
-
(automatic termination of an oil and gas lease for nonpayment of delay rental does not constitute a "proceeding" within the meaning of Bankruptcy Act § 11(e), 11 U.S.C. § 29(e))
-
(the alleged pollution of the James River and damages to adjoining landowners caused by a sewage plant does not involve traditional maritime jurisdiction and does not confer admiralty jurisdiction)
Cited by 40 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Courts of Appeals12
- Federal District Courts9
- Bankruptcy Courts10
- State Highest Courts3
- State Appellate Courts6
Relies on it most ⓘ
- In re P.I.N.E., Inc.
- German v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.
- Gull Air, Inc., Debtor. Federal Aviation Administration v. Gull Air, Inc.
- Santa Fe Development & Mortgage Corp. v. McCormack (In re Santa Fe Development & Mortgage Corp.)
- Getzoff v. Joe & L., Inc. (In re Joe & L., Inc.)
- Ravalese v. Town of East Hartford
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.