Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Dougherty v. Haaland

Dougherty v. Haaland, 444 U.S. 992 (1979)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1979-12-10
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • Virginia riparian owner not entitled to damages for diminished value because of pollution of water by municipality
  • unattractive use to which city put James River may have detrimental effect on value of property along shore but does not constitute due process violation
  • automatic termination of an oil and gas lease for nonpayment of delay rental does not constitute a "proceeding" within the meaning of Bankruptcy Act § 11(e), 11 U.S.C. § 29(e)
  • the alleged pollution of the James River and damages to adjoining landowners caused by a sewage plant does not involve traditional maritime jurisdiction and does not confer admiralty jurisdiction
  • automatic termination of an oil and gas lease for nonpayment of delay rental does not constitute a “proceeding” within the meaning of Bankruptcy Act s 11(e), 11 U.S.C. s 29(e)

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Dougherty v. Haaland. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
50 opinions

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.