About: Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : umbel-rc:Event, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FKimball_Laundry_Co._v._United_States

Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States, 338 U.S. 1 (1949), affirmed the principle set forth in The West River Bridge Company v. Dix et al., 47 U.S. 507 (1848); that is, that intangible property rights are condemnable via the eminent domain power, and that just compensation must be given to the owners of such rights.

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	Thing case Legal Case unit of work Legal case yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity Supreme Court of the United States case umbel-rc:Event
rdfs:label	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States (en)
rdfs:comment	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States, 338 U.S. 1 (1949), affirmed the principle set forth in The West River Bridge Company v. Dix et al., 47 U.S. 507 (1848); that is, that intangible property rights are condemnable via the eminent domain power, and that just compensation must be given to the owners of such rights. (en)
foaf:name	(en) Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States (en)
dcterms:subject	1949 in United States case law History of Omaha, Nebraska United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Vinson Court Takings Clause case law
Wikipage page ID	11020151 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1024217528 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	1949 in United States case law Arguendo Hugo Black List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 338 United States Army United States District Court for the District of Nebraska Intangible property History of Omaha, Nebraska United States Supreme Court cases Eminent domain United States Supreme Court cases of the Vinson Court Takings Clause case law Wiley Blount Rutledge William O. Douglas Just compensation Going concern Justice Frankfurter Justice Reed L. Ed. Business value Omaha, Nebraska A.L.R.2d Justice Vinson
Link from a Wikipage to an external page	https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/338/1/ http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp%3FCiteID=424868
sameAs	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Ussc dbt:US5thAmendment dbt:Laundry_navbox
Dissent	Douglas (en)
JoinDissent	Vinson, Black, Reed (en)
JoinMajority	Jackson, Burton, Rutledge, Murphy (en)
LawsApplied	U.S. Const. amend. V (en)
ParallelCitations	17280.0 (second)
Prior	On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. (en)
USPage	1 (xsd:integer)
USVol	338 (xsd:integer)
ArgueDate	0001-12-07 (xsd:gMonthDay)
ArgueYear	1948 (xsd:integer)
case	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States, (en)
DecideDate	0001-06-27 (xsd:gMonthDay)
DecideYear	1949 (xsd:integer)
fullname	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States (en)
Holding	Loss in going concern value, though related in part to intangibles, is property capable of being destroyed by the government so as to give rise to an obligation of just compensation under the fifth amendment. (en)
justia	https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/338/1/
Litigants	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States (en)
majority	Frankfurter (en)
other source	Oklahoma State Courts Network (en)
other url	http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp%3FCiteID=424868
has abstract	Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States, 338 U.S. 1 (1949), affirmed the principle set forth in The West River Bridge Company v. Dix et al., 47 U.S. 507 (1848); that is, that intangible property rights are condemnable via the eminent domain power, and that just compensation must be given to the owners of such rights. In this case, the United States filed a petition in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska to condemn the plant of the Kimball Laundry Company in Omaha, Nebraska, for use by the Army. After the District Court granted the United States immediate possession of the facilities of the company for the requested period, the owner of the family business claimed that he had been denied just compensation, and contended that the award should have included some allowance for diminution in the value of the business due to the destruction of its customer base. (en)
Concurrence	Rutledge (en)
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:Kimball_Laundry_Co._v._United_States?oldid=1024217528&ns=0
page length (characters) of wiki page	7325 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:Kimball_Laundry_Co._v._United_States
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of	December 1948 List of laundry topics Eminent domain 338 U.S. 1 Kimball Laundry Co. v United States Kimball laundry co. v. united states Kimball laundry co.
is Wikipage redirect of	338 U.S. 1 Kimball Laundry Co. v United States Kimball laundry co. v. united states Kimball laundry co.
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:Kimball_Laundry_Co._v._United_States

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 67 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software