Legal Document

344 U.S. 149 73 Supreme Court Reporter 200 97 L.Ed. 157 UNITED STATESv.CALTEX (PHILIPPINES), Incorporated et al. Number 16. Argued Oct. 20, 1952. Decided Dec. 8, Rehearing Denied Jan. 12, 1953. See 919, 345. Mr. Holmes Baldridge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Albert R. Connelly, New York City, respondents Shell company of Philippine Islands, Ltd., and Standard-Vacuum Oil Leo T. Kissam, respondent Caltex (Philippines), Chief Justice VINSON delivered the opinion Court. 1 Each oil companies owned terminal facilities in Pandacan district Manila at time Japanese attack upon Pearl Harbor. These were used to receive, handle store petroleum products from incoming ships release them further distribution throughout Islands. Wharves, rail automotive equipment, pumps, pipe lines, storage tanks, warehouses included property on hand outbreak war, as well a normal supply products. 2 News Harbor reached early morning December 1941. On same day, enemy air attacks mounted against our forces Philippines, thereafter launched his amphibious assault. 3 1941, United States Army, through its Quartermaster, stationed control officer terminals. Operations continued respondents' plants, but civilian use was severely restricted. A major share existing supplies requisitioned by Army. 4 The military situation Philippines grew worse. In face advance, Commanding General 23, ordered withdrawal all troops Luzon Bataan Peninsula. 25, he declared be an open city. that Engineer staff addressed each letters stating deposts 'are Army.' stated: 'Any action deemed necessary destruction this will handled An engineer employ one commissioned first lieutenant Army Corps Engineers facilitate design. 5 26, received orders prepare demolition. 27, while planes bombing area, met with representatives companies. had been transmitted Letters Deputy Staff, command MacArthur, also sent companies, directing remaining vital parts plants. Plans laid carry out these instructions, expedite removal which might still field, lay demolition network about given, their insistence, penciled receipt stocks Caltex. 6 At 5:40 p.m., 31, entering Manila, personnel completed successful All unused destroyed, factilities rendered useless enemy. deprived valuable logistic weapon. 7 After demanded compensation or destroyed Government paid transportation equipment either it refused compensate facilities. Claiming constitutional right under Fifth Amendment1 just facilities, sued Claims. Recovery allowed. We granted certiorari review judgment. 343 955, 72 1050. 8 As reflected findings Claims, there two rather distinct phases operations District Cecember While exercised considerable over business terminals during period between 12 not, according below, assumption actual physical proprietary dominion period.2 Bound findings, do not now question holding Claims prior 27 no seizure must paid. 9 Accordingly, is legal significance events occurred 31 concerns us. Respondents concede destroy installations. But they insist created themselves exact fair what destroyed. 10 argument draws heavily statements Mitchell versus Harmony, 1852, 13 How. 115, 14 75, Russell, 1871, Wall. 623, 20 474. agree opinions lend some support view.3 language those cases far broader than holdings. Both involved impressed subsequent neither Army's purpose limited, case, sole objective destroying strategic value prevent using wage war more successfully. 11 close reading Russell shows are precedent establish compensable taking case. Nor exhaust has said subject. Pacific Co., 1887, 120 227, 490, 30 634, Field, speaking unanimous Court, discussed length. That case bridges states retreating Northern impede advance Confederate Army.4 Though point directly involved, raised whether act constituted answered negative: 'The injury private battle, bombardment cities towns, many other ways borne sufferers alone, consequences. Whatever would embarrass enemy, breaking up roads, burning bridges, cripple defeat him, means subsistence, lawfully commanding general. Indeed, imperative duty direct destruction. necessities called justified this. safety state such overrides considerations loss.'5 It may true went beyond precise questions issue. principles expressed novel nor startling, common law long recognized times imminent peril—such when fire threatened whole community—the sovereign could, immunity, few lives could saved.6 And Railroad later made basis Juragua Iron States, 1909, 212 297, 29 385, 53 520, where recovery denied owners factory American soldiers field Cuba because thought structure housed germs contagious disease. Therefore, principle down Field dictum enunicated it, we hold today. view, govern majority arguing contrary, have placed great emphasis fact 'deliberation' singling property, 'requisitioning' owners, exercising 'control' before devastating it. need labor labels; describe adequately done, show consequences done. 'requisition' order evacuate premises slated behind design realizing any stragtegic area soon capture. 15 Had hesitated, only after retreat, certainly claims compensation. did hesitate. doubtful concern niceties entered into decision plants promptly yet thoroughly.7 think legally significant effected withdrawal. short matter due fortunes become potential weapon invader. appropriated use. better sooner 16 terse Amendment comprehensive promise make who suffer every ravage burden war. This wartime losses attributed solely sovereign.8 No rigid rules can distinguish noncompensable losses. judged own facts. general seem especially applicable here. Viewed realistically, then, trained team engineers impending different Adhering conclude court below erred presented 17 Reversed. 18 DOUGLAS, whom BLACK concurs, dissenting. 19 & N Immigration Nationality Decisions doubt authority select particular whatever weight be, believe requires taking. nature public nuisance, help win clearly end animals, food, defense effort. says, seems me guiding should this: Whenever government determines person's be—is essential effort appropriates good, purse individual, shold bear loss. '* * shall taken use, without compensation.' shortly contemplated leasing plan never put effect. operate supra, said, pages 627—628: 'Extraordinary unforseen occasions arise, however, doubt, extreme necessity immediate danger, service, seized even consent owner *. Exigencies kind arise emergency, magistrate, gives right, clear emergency shown exist justified. Such justification shown, rule settled purpose, if fully proved, trespasser, bound full owner.' narrow issue whether, rebuilt previously charge expense rebuilding. held railroad. page 234, 493. For earlier expressing see, e.g., Bowditch Boston, 1879, 101 16, 18—19, 25 980; Respublica Sparhawk, 1788, Dall. 357, 174; Parham Justices, 1850, Ga. 341, 348—349. Kent's Commentaries (14th ed.) 338. Cf. following appears, 362: 'We find, indeed, memorable instance folly recorded vol. Clarendon's History, mentioned, Lord Mayor London, 1666, city fire, give directions for, to, pulling forty wooden houses, removing furniture, &c. belonging lawyersof temple, then circuit, fear answerable trespass; consequence conduct, half burnt.' Lichter 1948, 334 742, 787—788, 68 1294, 1317—1318, 92 1694; Bowles Willingham, 1943, 321 503, 517—519, 64 641, 648—649, 88 892; Omnia Commercial 1923, 261 502, 43 437, 67 773.

Classification Label: 3