United States v. Virginia Electric & Power Company (1960)

Docket
49
Decided
1960-01-01
Category
General

Summary

Question: Does land used for easement have compensable value when appropriated by the government? Conclusion: Yes. Justice Potter Stewart delivered the opinion for the 6-3 majority. The Supreme Court held that the land the government was taking for easement had market value, and the Fifth Amendment prevents the government from taking private property without compensation. The Court also held that the district court’s method of determining the value of the land was correct, but the determination of how much of that compensation is due to the Virginia Electric Company was not correct. The district court granted compensation based on the maximum possible value rather than the actual value based on land use. In his concurring opinion, Justice William O. Douglas wrote that the owner of the easement did not have rights to anything that gained value from the flow of the stream. However, the owner did have the rights to anything that was considered “property” under the Fifth Amendment and deserved to be justly compensated when the government takes that. Justice Charles E. Whittaker wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that compensation should be based on the value the land the owner had at the time the government took it. Because the Virginia Electric Company only owned that land in the hope that it would gain permission from the government to build a dam, the land had no value to the company when it was taken. He argued that the Fifth Amendment required compensation only based on what value the owner had lost rather than what the government has gained. Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice Hugo L. Black joined in the dissent.

View the full interactive analysis on SCOTUS Lens →