Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant Cross-Appellee, v. 1,380.09 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATED IN CALDWELL PARISH, STATE OF LOUISIANA, et al. and Unknown Owners, Defendants, Bodcaw Company, Defendant-Appellee Cross-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1979-04-27
Citations: 594 F.2d 169
Docket Number: No. 75-2328
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant Cross-Appellee, v. 1,380.09 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATED IN CALDWELL PARISH, STATE OF LOUISIANA, et al. and Unknown Owners, Defendants, Bodcaw Company, Defendant-Appellee Cross-Appellant.
Judges: Before COWEN, GOLDBERG and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 594
Pages: 169–169

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant Cross-Appellee, v. 1,380.09 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATED IN CALDWELL PARISH, STATE OF LOUISIANA, et al. and Unknown Owners, Defendants, Bodcaw Company, Defendant-Appellee Cross-Appellant.
No. 75-2328.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 27, 1979.
On Rehearing July 16, 1979.
Donald E. Walter, U. S. Atty., Leven H. Harris, Asst. U. S. Atty., Shreveport, La., Wallace H. Johnson, Jacques B. Gelin, Eva R. Datz, Peter R. Taft, Asst. Attys. Gen., Raymond N. Zagone, Anne S. Almy, Attys., James W. Moorman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff-appellant cross-appellee.
Burt W. Sperry, L. Michael Ashbrook, George Wear, Jr., Monroe, La., for defendants.
Senior Judge of the United States Court of Claims, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Before COWEN, GOLDBERG and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
The decision and judgment of this Court (574 F.2d 238) having been reversed by the Supreme Court on February 26, 1979, sub nom. United States v. Bodcaw Company, - U.S. -, 99 S.Ct. 1066, 59 L.Ed.2d 257, we now affirm the judgment of the District Court in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision, and thus vacate our prior holding herein that appellant is entitled, as just compensation, to reimbursement of appraisal expenses incurred herein.