United States v. Honolulu Plantation Co. Honolulu Plantation Co. v. United States

Good Law
182 F.2d 172·1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2765
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 24, 195012023_1California4,461 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fee, J.

The United States instituted thirteen actions, now consolidated, to condemn land in Hawaii. Honolulu Plantation Company had several claims for compensation, part of which have been paid. But Plantation claims “severance damages” because of loss of value of its properties as an operating concern by condemnation of property held in fee by third parties, resulting in an overcapacity of the sugar mill and refinery,, since it was claimed there was failure to obtain the customary supply of cane from such fields.

All the relevant evidence as to the claim of “severance damage,” which was heard by the learned Trial Judge, was produced by Plantation. The United States contended the claim was unsupported. The bulk of the testimony consisted of the opinions of experts as to valuation of the properties as a whole, including leases on other lands not taken, before and after condemnation. These values were ultimately based, generally speaking, on the invested capital necessary to produce refined sugar from certain areas, upon earnings of Plantation and its value as a going concern.

The record shows Plantation actually owned a comparatively small amount of land in fee upon which the structures…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.