Case ID: us-ct-cl_61/html/1020-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice BeaNdeis", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MITCHELL v. THE UNITED STATES
    [58 C. Cls. 443; 267 U. S. 341]
    Judgment was rendered in favor of the United States in the court below. On appeal the judgment was affirmed, the Supreme Court deciding:
    1. The act of October 6, 1917, c. 79, 40 Stat. 345, to increase facilities for testing ordnance materials, appropriated money to pay for buildings, land, etc., “ and damages and losses to persons * * * resulting from the procurement of the land,” and provided that if land and improvements could not be procured by purchase, the President was authorized to take them over, with all appurtenant rights, and the United States should make just compensation therefor, to be determined by the President; and that if the amount so determined were unsatisfactory to the person entitled, he should be paid 75 per cent of it and be entitled to sue the United States under Jud. Code, sections 24 and 145, to recover such further sum as added to the 75 per cent would make up just compensation. Held, that persons whose land was taken and who accepted the compensation fixed by the President were not thereby precluded from claiming additional compensation under the Fifth Amendment, as for a taking of their business, or from claiming damages under-the act itself for the loss of the business.
    March 2, 1925.
    2. It is a settled rule that damages resulting from a loss or destruction of business incidental to a taking of land are not recoverable as part of the compensation for the land taken.
    3. By its reference to “losses * * * resulting from procurement of land,” the above act doubtless authorized the Secretary of War to consider losses resulting from destruction of business when procuring land by agreement, but it is not to be construed as a departure from the settled policy of Congress to limit compensation for a taking of land to interests in the land taken.
   Mr. Justice BeaNdeis

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court