Document: 338 U.S. 396 70 S.Ct. 217 94 L.Ed. 195 UNITED STATESv.TORONTO, HAMILTON & BUFFALO NAVIGATION CO. No. 39. Argued Nov. 9, 1949. Decided Dec. 12, Reversed and remanded. Mr. Paul A. Sweeney, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Gerald E. Dwyer, New York City, respondent. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 We are faced again with elusive questions property valuation in determining whether United States awarded 'just compensation' under Fifth Amendment when it took respondent's car ferry, Maitland 1, authority § 902 Merchant Marine Act 1936, as amended, 53 Stat. 1254, 1255, 46 U.S.C. 1242, U.S.C.A. 1242. The Government requisitioned vessel 1942, determined its fair value $72,500. In 1943, respondent exercised option to accept 75 per cent award, 1945 brought action Court Claims recover $711,753 additional amount necessary just compensation. Court, two judge dissenting, held that was $161,833.72, more than twice Government's original determination. 81 F.Supp. 237, 112 Ct.Cl. 240. case here on certiorari, 336 965, 69 938, because presents problems difficulty importance practical application general standard 2 facts were found by Claims. They must be stated some detail. 3 1. a conventional, steel-hull, two-stacker, twin-screw ferry railroad cars, built 1916. Until 1932 she plied across Lake Erie between Ashtabula, Ohio, Port Maitland, Canada. She only ship route, her principal cargo coal steel company Hamilton, Ontario. On Canadian side, connecting rail line moved destination Hamilton. But convenient route Ontario caused sharp decline traffic beginning 1928. And 'new Welland Canal' opened 1932, larger ships carried load directly abandoned line. From 1935 laid up at dock Ohio. 4 November 29, 1935, chartered an unspecified rate ferrying freight Michigan, thereafter, convenience parties, title transferred Michigan concern. transfer recited total consideration $166,000 included 'recapture' clause. December 15, 1937, this right upon payment $92,894.80 returned Ashtabula where lay until August, 1942. 5 2. Cost, book scrap value, upkeep earnings Maitland.—The 1916 cost $362,800. Respondent, wholly owned subsidiary Central Pacific Railways, acquired from own president year, paying $394,560. 1917 1930, spent $38,115.46 'additions betterments vessel.' Repairs 1922 amounted $20,329.11 annum. Lay-up expenses 1938 1942—there is no evidence earlier years—averaged $2,700 including repairs. It would have $35,000 place operating condition 6 Her insured 1942 $100,000; $13,500. do not know reproduction time. Book figured less depreciation one each first three years four annum remaining period $75,509.51. varied during operated average annual net income through 31, 1920, $17,216.28; both 1921 operations deficit, while next five profit highest level, averaging $129,893.92 1928 1929 progressively bad one-half showed losses, $15,417.82 year. June so poor docked operation never resumed. entire operation, ending $42,816.36, amounting return 10.41 investment. 7 3. Sales other vessels like class Great Lakes.—After type obsolete demand ferries Lakes. Construction 'outer belt' around Chicago yards abolition differential made all-rail transportation, or movement modern ferries, shippers. 8 'there number secondary uses which did exist time' use Conversion automobile relatively simple economical; sales similar had occurred 1936 1940 use. prices ranged $25,000 $65,000, but conversion repair costs greater age maintenance record vessels. 9 Two same plans sold Lakes bulk carriers pulpwood. Sale $24,000 $37,724.04, respectively. Neither these vessels, however, state Maitland. One been 1903, 1910. 10 4. Atlantic Coast.—While there finding '1942, such Florida Cuba,' 'demand' reflected itself market. equipped operate salt water 'not than' $115,000 equip move Florida, strengthening ocean service. There able sell transported nor successful possible. 11 seems predicated 1941 1945. Only ship, Grand Haven, Lakes, after hostilities ended last war. smaller faster $50,000 price. floated down Mississippi Gulf 'considered expense.' neither needed 12 very 1914 1920; but, unlike Haven coast originally constructed travel. sale $100,000 $170,000 vessel, Henry M. Flagler,1 $332,500 others.2 latter required about $20,000 All 'purchased' requisition. 13 (81 244), 'the condemned' 'unique, * peculiarly situated' without relative comparison concluded worth residual ferry', thus requiring resort 'a *, conjunction contemporaneous transactions close similarity value.' called mean ferry' $50,000; 'attributing Maitland', capitalized comparable sixteen figure $389,767.15, 'according actuarial tables evidence.' court then deducted percentage difference life expectancy fresh (20%), sailing Under formula, $161,833.72 'for available most profitable adaptable time taking.' 14 Perhaps warning has repeated determination cannot reduced inexorable rules. Suffice say balance public's need claimant's loss struck, cases, awarding claimant monetary 'market value' taken. See v. Miller, 317 369, 374, 63 276, 280, 87 336, 147 A.L.R. 55. Usually standard; usually approaches 'just' compensation demanded Amendment. 15 At times, peculiar circumstances may make impossible determine been, example, few we predict any assurance paid postulate 'no market' question. does put out hand bearing scattered what ordinary purchaser property.3 simply wary give sparse weight accord 'market' price, take into those special affected our hypothetical buyer. means measuring relevance—but only, course, prospective paid. 16 agree sense discussed above. hardly think dissimilar require varying offered sale. basic agreement below measures relevant. 17 substitute standards fact assistance assessing Original well termed 'false past'4 where, here, present market way reflects cost. So cost, reproducing property.5 past significant they tend reflect future returns.6 see relevance Maitland's issue capacity earn elsewhere. entirely too remote bear vessel's follows Claims' reliance error. 18 said absence price not, ipso facto, rid isolated all relevance. None findings based before us, likely differences calculated degree accuracy. indicate insurance valuation. Rule 3, Advisory Board Just Compensation, 1943 A.M.C. 1443, 1444. cf. Westmoreland Chemical Color Co. Public Service Comm., 1928, 293 Pa. 326, 331, 142 867, 869; Report Proceedings Board, supra, pp. 152—153. 19 yet consider given 'demand.' question considered taken 20 cases involving requisition coal, rule 'private public use, prevailing taking, compensation.' River Collieries, 1923, 262 341, 344, 43 S.ct. 565, 567, 67 1014; Davis Newton Coal Co., 1925, 267 292, 301, 45 305, 306, 617. (Emphasis supplied.) Lakes; quoted terms inapplicable. can established us. reminded individual value. 21 readily salable articles, nearest taking is, least ususal case, thumb, pecuniary position he occupied taking. Such considerations seem underlie result law sales, damages. Thus, Tower Phillips, 1874, 23 Wall. 471, 71, plaintiff planned defendant's best Cairo Orleans. Yet breach contract 'more direct' measurement damages: Harris Panama R. 58 N.Y. 660; Williston, Sales, §§ 599, 599e (Rev. ed. 1948), cited. 22 owners would, if possible, geographic restriction. doubt, liners circumstances, fail negotiate beyond port lay—whether 'goods' subject sales.7 Were conditions normal,8 could call award unless relevant foreign markets, considered. Supplementary Rules 1382, 1383; Glaspy Cabot, 1883, 135 Mass. 435. course degree, foreclose facts. Olson States, 1934, 292 246, 255, 54 704, 708, 78 1236, relied below, makes clear. This 'highest reasonably near considered, necessarily, measure full extent prospect affects privately held.' Holmes warned 'only far it'; 'what tribunal later date wise give'. City Sage, 1915, 239 57, 61, 36 25, 26, 60 143. 24 error according values. Whether problem advantageous distant port, burden claimant9 show buyer investigated moored Ohio dock; owner undergone trouble expense send his possible sale; or, finally, either possibilities effect businessman trade do, claims do; contrary invite perjury, smack kind purchaser. supra. 25 A bare reciting use—and war's end—does meet burden. leave final open further below. finding, substantial now probabilities sufficient warrant fixing add clearly bound range 26 record, justifies adopted judgment reversed cause remanded proceedings light opinion. 27 ordered. 28 DOUGLAS part decision case. 29 FRANKFURTER, concurring. 30 Even though I join Court's direction, treacherous nature matter appropriate separate statement views. 31 Resort conventional formulas ascertaining rarely bought sold, having therefore recognized yield fruitful results. variables many permit anything except informed judgment. Everything, therefore, turns process end difficult tenuous solid inference. 32 duty lower courts. since concerned ascertainment rather values, whose primary estimates ought cramped rules rigid artificial. If presented particular really turn, data reasonableness inferences drawn them arriving compensation, training experience fact-finders become important. 33 jury area within speculation things roam large should narrowly confined Kimball Laundry 20, 1434, 1445. valuer particularly consists judges whom fairly attributed expertness comes frequent dealing desirable allow considerable freedom hard fast significance them. Barring obviously wrong criteria, baseless proof, counsels empiricism problems. suggests shall avoid abstract pronouncements distort distorted case-by-case adjudicatory especially nature. Either lip-service will decisions rooted outside them, fitting achieve impractical 34 approach cae this: 35 starting point computation capitalization 1932. While disclose reasonable relation year waters. To serve springboard much temptation unbridled even experienced judges. days quick mobility persons unjustifiably artificial confine mobile property, Of active condemned uses, places, helpful seeking against unusual salability reason location atypical excluded logical already current prices. and, got translated dollars cents, none excluding Cuba. 37 critically used. thing exclude transferable quite another assume proof positive base assumption. Particularly true transport waters outfit salt-water expenditure arithmetic located risk venture implies casts doubt likelihood trade. For impact opportunities short task valuing acceptance rejection toto. Like degree. 38 go indicating broad lines adjudication Claims, leaving discretion applying indicated it. analysis outlined fitted us.1 am prepared specify logically After enough set forth findings, regarding demand. May private party who thereafter $63,820 second requisition, July 28, 1941, War Shipping Administration. These Joseph Parrott Estrada Palma, Administration June, Considerations might affect rulings tried concern us here. Schmalenbach, Finanzierungen, 4—6 (3d ed., Leipzig, 1922), Bonbright, Valuation Property 147, n. (1937). 'It protected Amendment.' Brooks-Scanlon Corp. 1924, 265 106, 123, 44 474, 68 934. ch. VIII. Compensation 170 (United Maritime Commission, Administration, mimeographed, 1943). Cf. Standard Oil Jersey Southern 268 146, 465, 890; Hisko, Cir., 1931, F.2d 540. Orgel, Eminent Domain, XIV (1936); Nichols, 446 (2d 1917); I. C. White, 295 F. 593, 595, 596. As separation made, business skill, 1949, 1434. Rivara James Stewart 241 259, 264, 149 N.E. 851, 852, Cardozo, J.; Behnke Bede (1927) K.B. 649. Meering Duke, L.J.(o.s.) 211 (K.B. 1828) (Stamp Act). note 5, 64—71. ex rel. Use T.V.A. Powelson, 319 266, 273, 1047, 1051, 1390. 22, 1939, 752, amending 3(b) February 13, 936, 939. also 41

Category: 3