Kohl v. United States
91 U.S. 367, 1875 U.S. LEXIS 1378, 23 L. Ed. 449 (1876)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The United States government possesses the sovereign power of eminent domain, which it may exercise within the states to acquire private property for public use without state consent, and federal circuit courts have jurisdiction to hear such condemnation proceedings.
Facts:
- The United States government identified a need for a site in Cincinnati, Ohio, to construct a building for a post office, custom house, courthouse, and other federal offices.
- On March 2, 1872, Congress passed an act authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase a suitable site for this purpose.
- On June 10, 1872, Congress passed a subsequent act appropriating funds for the acquisition of the site either by 'private sale or by condemnation.'
- The Secretary of the Treasury initiated a legal proceeding to condemn a specific parcel of land in Cincinnati for the federal building.
- P. Kohl and others were lessees holding a leasehold estate in a portion of the property the government sought to condemn.
Procedural Posture:
- The United States initiated a condemnation proceeding in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio to acquire land in Cincinnati.
- The defendants, P. Kohl and others, were lessees of the property and were named parties in the proceeding.
- During the trial, the lessees demanded a separate trial to determine the value of their leasehold interest, apart from the valuation of the overall property.
- The Circuit Court denied the request for a separate trial for each interest and instructed the jury to determine the value of the entire parcel and the separate values of the leasehold and ownership estates within the same proceeding.
- The lessees (plaintiffs in error) appealed the Circuit Court's ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the United States government have the authority under the Constitution to appropriate private land within a state for public use through eminent domain, and do federal circuit courts have jurisdiction over such condemnation proceedings?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Strong
Yes. The power of eminent domain is an essential attribute of sovereignty that the federal government possesses and may exercise within the states to perform its constitutional functions. Such a proceeding is a 'suit at common law' within the jurisdiction of the federal circuit courts. The right of eminent domain is a political necessity inseparable from sovereignty. The powers vested in the federal government by the Constitution would be rendered 'nugatory' if the government could not acquire land necessary for public uses, such as for post offices and courthouses. The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, which requires just compensation, is an implicit recognition of this power. The court further reasoned that a condemnation proceeding initiated by the government to enforce a legal right is a 'suit' under the Judiciary Act of 1789, thereby granting federal circuit courts jurisdiction. This power is complete in itself and can neither be enlarged nor diminished by a state.
Dissenting - Justice Field
No. While the federal government possesses the right of eminent domain, federal courts lack the inherent jurisdiction to hear condemnation cases unless Congress has specifically provided for it through legislation. A proceeding to condemn property is not a 'suit of a civil nature at common law or in equity' as defined by the Judiciary Act of 1789. Instead, it is an 'inquisition' to ascertain a fact (the value of the property) preliminary to the taking. Therefore, without a specific statute from Congress outlining the procedure and granting jurisdiction, the federal circuit courts cannot hear these cases. The dissent also disagreed that the statutory authority 'to purchase' land necessarily includes the authority to acquire it by compulsory condemnation.
Analysis:
This case is a landmark decision that firmly established the federal government's inherent power of eminent domain as a function of its sovereignty. It clarified that this power is not dependent on state permission and can be exercised directly by the federal government within any state to fulfill its constitutional duties. By interpreting condemnation proceedings as 'suits at common law,' the Court also provided a jurisdictional basis for these actions in federal court, significantly strengthening the federal government's ability to acquire property for public projects without being obstructed by state legislatures or private landowners.
