The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P condemned a strip across Ds' lands for tracks of the Central Pacific Railroad. The project was funded and committed to on August 26, 1937. On December 14, 1938, P filed a complaint in eminent domain against Ds and others whose lands were needed for the relocation of the railroad. P estimated just compensation to be paid at $2,550, and that sum was deposited in court. Ds asked for the money, and the court directed the Clerk to pay each of them one-third of the deposit, or $850, on account of the compensation they were entitled to receive. A jury trial was held. Ds offered opinion evidence as to the fair market value of the tracts involved and also as to severance damage to lots of which portions were taken. Each testified to his opinion as to market value of the land taken as at December 14, 1938. P objected in that P had committed to the project August 26, 1937. P claimed that the increment in value to the December 14th date was improper. The trial court sustained the objection. The jury rendered verdicts for Ds. Ds, who had received $850 each on account of compensation were awarded less than the total paid them. Ds appealed. The Court of Appeals reversed holding that the trial judge erred in his rulings and his charge and that the District Court was without jurisdiction to award P a judgment for amounts overpaid. It held that Ds should have been allowed to testify with respect to fair market value without qualification. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.