Case Name: UNITED STATES v. MEYERS et al.
Court: United States District Court for the District of Connecticut
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1911-10-09
Citations: 190 F. 688
Docket Number: 
Parties: UNITED STATES v. MEYERS et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 190
Pages: 688–688

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES v. MEYERS et al.
(District Court, D. Connecticut.
October 9, 1911.)
Eminent Domain (§ 130 ) — Condemnation Proceedings — Damages.
In proceedings by the United States to condemn for a post office site property on which business buildings are situated, tenants are not entitled to recover special damages on account of the cost of removing their fixtures to a new location, nor for loss of profits during such removal.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Eminent Domain. Dee. Dig. § ISO.
Consequential and indirect damages in condemnation proceedings, see note to High Bridge Dumber Co. v. United States, 16 C. C. A. 468.]
Proceedings by the United States against Morris Meyers, Arthur E. Bernd, Adolph Huber, and the Savings Bank of Danbury to condemn site for post office at Danbury. On report of committee.
Judgment on report.
John T. Robinson, for plaintiff.
Canfield, Judson & Pullman, for defendants.
For other cases see same topic & § nttmbeb in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
PLATT, District Judge.
The committee correctly interpreted the law as I find it to be, disregarding all evidence touching the question of special damage to the tenants Bernd and Huber, which might grow out of taking down, carrying away, and setting up again in a new location, the fixtures in their stores, which they had the right to remove, together with loss of profits during the céssation of business resulting from such removal. What the damage would have been, if said testimony had been taken into account, is therefore immaterial, and the alternative part of the report is of no service to the court.
Let judgment be entered, based upon the original findings of the committee.