FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY QUERY - PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE ALLCASES,AMJUR DATABASE(S) -

1. H (NO.

Town of Fayal v. City of Eveleth, 587 N.W.2d 524, 1999 WL 1840, Minn.App., January 05, 1999 C2-98-875)

...public entity, is a public use. [8] Eminent Domain 148 28 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 16 Particular Uses or Purposes 148 28 k. Water Supply in General. Municipality's supplying water is a public use; legislature has expressly empowered a municipality to provide a waterworks systems. M.S.A. s 444.075 , subd. 1a. [9] Eminent Domain 148 28 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 16 Particular Uses or Purposes 148 28 k. Water Supply in General. City's water distribution to township resident's, even if held in a proprietary capacity, was a public use by a public body. [10] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

2. C 730)

Brittain v. Southern Ry. Co., 280 Ala. 650, 197 So.2d 453, Ala., March 30, 1967 (NO. 7 DIV.

...property for public use without consent of owner. [2] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature,

Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Right of railroad to maintain spur track and to go upon it with engines and cars for hauling and delivery of freight for hire was private property subjected to or devoted to a "public use" within meaning of statute prohibiting taking of such property for another public use unless actual necessity shall be proved and unless it be proved that other public use will not materially interfere with public use to which land is already subjected or devoted. Code 1940, Tit. 19, s 9 . [3] Eminent Domain 148 46 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 46 ...

3. Yel FlgVermont Hydro-Electric Corp. v. Dunn, 95 Vt. 144, 112 A. 223, 12 A.L.R. 1495, Vt., January 08, 1921 (NO. 259) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Where land is devoted to a public use, it cannot be taken by condemnation for another public use, unless the Legislature in express terms or by necessary implication has authorized it to be so taken. 190 Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148

47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. To bring property within the immunity from condemnation under general legislative authority as having already been legally appropriated to a public use, it is not necessary that it have been acquired by eminent domain; if its owner has devoted it to a public use which he is under legal obligation to maintain, it comes within the protection of the rule. 190 ...

4. Yel FlgGeorgia Dept. of Transp. v. Jasper County, 355 S.C. 631, 586 S.E.2d 853, 2003 WL 22119893, S.C., September 15, 2003 (NO. 25714) ...public use, if applicable, does not depend on whether the prior use was acquired by condemnation or purchase. See New York Cent. & H. R.R. Co. v. City of Buffalo, 200 N.Y. 113, 93 N.E. 520 (1910) . 2 [5] Consistent with this line of cases, we conclude the prior public use doctrine should be limited to those cases involving competing condemnors. It is for the condemning entity to determine whether privately owned property, although presently used for public benefit, should be condemned for a competing public use. The difficulty of injecting the judicial branch into the arena of competing "public uses " is in fact demonstrated by the one case in which this Court attempted to apply the doctrine of prior public use. In Tuomey Hosp. v. City of Sumter, 243 S.C. 544, 134 S.E.2d 744 (1964) ...

5. H

Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. City of Miami,

321 So.2d 545, Fla., July 24, 1975 (NO. 44874) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Generally, under the "prior public use doctrine" , property held by authority that has power of condemnation cannot be taken by another authority with same power of condemnation absent specific legislation. [2] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Where, in proceedings by city to condemn waterfront lands owned by railroad, both city and railroad possessed general powers of condemnation delegated to them by legislature, "prior public use doctrine" applied; the doctrine was not limited to situations involving two public bodies. [3] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I ...

6. C President and Fellows of Middlebury College v. Central Power Corp. of Vt., 101 Vt. 325, 143 A. 384, Vt., October 03, 1928 ...Property and Conveyances 101 2421 k. Capacity to acquire and hold property in general. (Formerly 101k434 ) Corporation may take property on trust collateral to expressed purposes of its institution. 192 Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In general. Distinction between public and private uses lies in character of use,

which must be determined by consideration of economic conditions and people's needs, as well as legal principles. 190 Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In general. Property appropriated to public use cannot be taken for another such use without express or implied legislative authority. 190 Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I ...

7. Yel FlgBuckhout v. City of Newport, 68 R.I. 280, 27 A.2d 317, 141 A.L.R. 1440, R.I., July 24, 1942 (NO. 1607) ...Property 268 223 k. Purposes for Which Property May Be Acquired or Held. The mere fact that property which city has purchased and used for a public purpose cannot be enjoyed by the public individually as can parks, streets, and commons, does not require finding that such property is not held in trust and devoted to a "public use". [5] Municipal Corporations 268 223 268 Municipal Corporations 268VI Property 268 223 k. Purposes for Which Property May Be Acquired or Held. The test of whether use of property by city is "public" or "private" consists in whether the use is made by the city in its governmental capacity or in its proprietary capacity. [6] Municipal Corporations 268 225(3) 268 Municipal Corporations 268VI Property 268 225 Sale or Other Disposition of Property 268 225(3) k. Property Acquired or Held for Special Purpose. ...

8. H

City of Blaine v. Feldstein, 129 Wash.App. 73, 117 P.3d 1169, 2005 WL 1941234, Wash.App. Div. 1, August 15, 2005 (NO. 55837-4-I) ...property to build a public boardwalk in city's downtown area. Over property owners' objection, the Superior Court, Whatcom County , Steven Mura , J., granted city's motion for entry of an order on public use and necessity. Property owners appealed. Holdings: The Court of Appeals , Coleman , J., held that: 2 (1) city was authorized to condemn property for public boardwalk, and 4 (2) substantial evidence supported determination that proposed boardwalk was a public use and subject to condemnation power of city. Affirmed . 1. Eminent Domain 198(1) ...

9. C

26 Am. Jur. 2d Eminent Domain s 104 American Jurisprudence, Second Edition Database updated August 2011 Laura Dietz, J.D., Glenda K. Harnad, J.D., of the National Legal Research Group, Inc., Alan J. Jacobs, J.D., Jack Levin, J.D., Jeffrey J. Shampo, J.D., Eric Surette, J.D., Lisa J. Zakolski, J.D. Eminent Domain I. Nature and Extent of Power E. Property Subject to Taking 2. Property Devoted to Public Use s 104. Use protecting property from subsequent takings; generally ...Levin, J.D., Jeffrey J. Shampo, J.D., Eric Surette, J.D., Lisa J. Zakolski, J.D. I. Nature and Extent of Power E. Property Subject to Taking 2. Property Devoted to Public Use Topic Summary Correlation Table References s 104. Use protecting property from

subsequent takings; generally West's Key Number Digest West's Key Number Digest, Eminent Domain k 47(1) It has been held that a public use is a use which concerns the whole community or promotes the general interest in its relation to any legitimate object of government and that property appropriated to a public use refers to property previously condemned for such purpose.[FN 1 ] It is long-established that to exempt property from condemnation under a general grant of the power of eminent domain because the property is already devoted to a public use, the owner must have a legal obligation to maintain the public use.[FN 2 ] If the use by the public is permissive and may be abandoned at any time, the property is not exempt.[FN 3] Property already devoted to a public use generally may not be taken by eminent domain, absent legislative or constitutional authority, if such taking would destroy the current use of the property.[FN 4] Caution: The rule is otherwise, however, where the property is not in actual public use and is not necessary or vital to the operation of the project or business concerned.[FN 5] Where the condemning authority has superior eminent-domain power than the agency using the land in question, the public-use doctrine has been found to be inapplicable.[FN 6 ] Land not devoted to the public use, although owned by a public-service corporation, may be taken under general legislative authority as freely as from a private individual, and special legislative authority is not necessary.[FN 7 ] Indeed, the rule

may be stated that one public utility company may condemn the property of another public utility company if the latter company is not using its property to serve the public, and in some instances municipalities and quasi-municipalities come under the same principle.[FN 8 ] A portion of a tract taken for a public use, but which is not essential to such use and which may be devoted to a different public use without seriously infringing upon the enjoyment of the first use, may be taken for the second use under general authority.[FN 9] [FN 1] Southern California Edison Co. v. Rice, 685 F.2d 354 (9th Cir. 1982) [FN 2] Vermont ... ...gristmill). [FN 4] Worthington v. Columbus, 100 Ohio St. 3d 103, 2003 -Ohio- 5099, 796 N.E.2d 920 (2003) The prior-public-use doctrine only applies to preclude a municipality from condemning property already dedicated to a public use if the property would be destroyed by the use to which the municipality proposed to condemn the property. City of Las Cruces v. El Paso Elec. Co., 1998 -NMSC- 006, 124 N.M. 640, 954 P.2d 72 (1998 ...

10. C State ex rel. Puget Sound & B.R. Ry. Co. v. Joiner, 182 Wash. 301, 47 P.2d 14, Wash., June 27, 1935 (NO. 25717) ...public use is conclusive, in absence of actual fraud or such arbitrary and capricious conduct as would amount to constructive fraud. [2] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to

Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Property is not exempt from condemnation because it may have been previously dedicated, appropriated, or devoted to public use. Rem.Rev.Stat. s 901 ; Const. art. 12, s 10 . [3] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

11. Red FlgCity of Las Cruces v. El Paso Elec. Co., 904 F.Supp. 1238, 1995 WL 664788, Util. L. Rep. P 14,073, D.N.M., October 23, 1995 (NO. CVI. 2:95-485 LCS, CIV.2:95385LCS/JHG) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Under New Mexico law, prior public use doctrine, requiring that city have specific statutory authority or authority by necessary implication to sustain municipal condemnation of existing public use, applies only if there is destruction, obliteration, or material impairment of prior use. [35] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

12. H City of Worthington v. City of Columbus, Not Reported in N.E.2d, 2002 WL 977341, 2002 -Ohio- 2330,

Ohio App. 10 Dist., May 14, 2002 (NO. 01AP-1119, 01AP-1120) ...property within the condemnor's corporate limits, even if such property is owned by another municipal corporation and is being put to a public use. This is especially true in the case at bar, where the public use is a park, which involves a governmental function, as opposed to appellant's proposed use, a cemetery expansion, which involves a proprietary function. There is simply no language in Section 3, Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution which would, by necessary implication, grant the authority to appellant to appropriate the subject property and thereby destroy the existing public use to which the property is currently being put. 6 {P 36} ... 13. C Oxford County Agr. Soc. v. School Administrative Dist. No. 17, 161 Me. 334, 211 A.2d 893, Me., July 21, 1965 ...public in some degree, they fell short of constituting such ' public uses' as would exempt society's property from eminent domain process. Appeal denied. 1. Eminent Domain 47(1) <<. In general. While activities of county agricultural society which conducted annual fair benefited public in some degree, they fell short of constituting such 'public uses' as would exempt society's property from eminent domain process. See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial constructions and definitions. 2. Eminent Domain 13, 47(1) <<. In general. The distinction between 'public use' and 'private use' lies in character of use and must to large extent depend on facts of each case; there are however certain essential

characteristics which must be present if use is to be deemed public and not private within meaning of eminent domain law. <<. In general. ...

14. H Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. City of Miami, 372 So.2d 152, Fla.App. 3 Dist., June 12, 1979 (NO. 78-655) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Doctrine of prior public use, simply stated, denies exercise of delegated power of condemnation where proposed use will destroy existing public use or prevent proposed public use unless authority to do so has been expressly given by legislature or must necessarily be implied. [5] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

15. Yel FlgMono Power Co. v. City of Los Angeles, 284 F. 784, C.C.A.9 (Cal.), November 06, 1922 (NO. 3782) ...property for any of the uses mentioned in such title is 'an agent of the state,' or a 'person in charge of such use,' within the meaning of those terms as used in such title.' Section 1237, Code of Civil Procedure , provides: 'Eminent domain is the right of the people or government to take private property for public use. This right may be exercised in the manner provided in this title.' Section 1240, Code

of Civil Procedure , provides: 'The private property which may be taken under this title includes: (1) All real property belonging to any person. ...

16. Red FlgTuomey Hospital v. City of Sumter, 243 S.C. 544, 134 S.E.2d 744, S.C., February 13, 1964 (NO. 18170) ...public use was inference drawn by pleader from facts and was not admitted by demurrer. [8] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. The distinction between "public use" and "private use" lies in character of use and must to large extent depend on facts of each case; there are however certain essential characteristics which must be present if use is to be deemed public and not private within meaning of eminent domain law. Code 1962, ss 25-161 to 25-170 , 47-68.1 ; Const. art. 1, s 17 . [9] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

17. Yel FlgHTK Management, L.L.C. v. Seattle Popular Monorail Authority, 155 Wash.2d 612, 121 P.3d 1166, 2005 WL 2709354, Wash., October 20, 2005 (NO. 76462-0) ...public uses. FN13. Ariz. Const. art. II, s 17 ( "Whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be

public , the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public." ). Colo. Const. art. II, s 15 ( "[W]henever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public." ). See also Pub. Serv. Co. of Colo. v. City of Loveland, 79 Colo. 216, 245 P. 493 (1926) . Miss. Const. art. III, s 17 ( ...

18. C Laurel Beach Ass'n v. Town of Milford, 148 Conn. 233, 169 A.2d 748, Conn., March 28, 1961 ...property owner appealed. The Supreme Court of Errors, Murphy, J., held that devotion to public use within statute exempting from taxation property belonging to municipal corporation which is used for public purpose means a use open to public generally, and property in question was not exempt. No error. (1) 1. Taxation k217 <<. Property of municipal or other public corporations. Even though party is an admitted municipal corporation, its properties are not exempt from taxation unless devoted to public use. C.G.S.A. s 12-81(4); 13 Sp.Acts 1899, p. 129 as amended 18 Sp.Acts 1919, p. 244. (2) 2. Taxation k217 <<. Property of municipal or other public corporations. ...

19. C Ferguson v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 202 Iowa 508, 210 N.W. 604, 54 A.L.R. 1, Iowa, October 26, 1926 (NO.

37380) ...Public Use 148 13 k. In General. Order of Board of Railroad Commissioners, if it deprives railroad of private property for other than public use, violates Const. art. 1, s 18 . 190 Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. Substantial benefit to public from use of property by private persons does not necessarily constitute a public use of property; "public use" and " public benefit" not being synonymous. 190 Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. Term "public use" means that public possesses certain rights to the use or employment of property ( Const. art. 1, s 18) . 190 Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. ...

20. Yel FlgMarin County Water Co. v. Marin County, 145 Cal. 586, 79 P. 282, Cal., December 24, 1904 (NO. 3,918) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(6) k. Appropriating Highways, Streets, and Parks. Code Civ.Proc. s 1237 , defines eminent domain as the right of the people or government to take private property for public use. Section 1240, enumerating the private property which may be taken

therefor, includes all real property belonging to any person; lands belonging to this state, or to any county, incorporated city, etc., not appropriated to public use, and property taken for public use providing, however, that such property shall not be taken unless for a more necessary public use than that to which it has been already appropriated. Held, that land of a private person subject to an easement for a public highway may be taken by a water company for a dam and reservoir as for a more necessary public use ...

21. H Township of West Orange v. 769 Associates, L.L.C., 172 N.J. 564, 800 A.2d 86, 2002 WL 1339485, N.J., June 20, 2002 (NO. A-45 SEPT.TERM 2001) ...property acquired must be taken for a "public use," the state must pay "just compensation" in exchange for the property, and no person shall be deprived of his or her property without due process of law. [5] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In general. For purposes of justifying use of eminent domain, a " public use " is anything that tends to enlarge resources, increase the industrial energies, and manifestly contributes to the general welfare and the prosperity of the whole community, and thus, "public use" is synonymous with "public benefit," "public advantage," or "public utility." [6] Eminent Domain 148 14 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 14 k. Extent of use or benefit. ...

22. Yel FlgBlack Rock Placer Mining Dist. v. Summit Water & Irrigation Co., 56 Cal.App.2d 513, 133 P.2d 58, Cal.App. 3 Dist., January 05, 1943 (NO. CIV. 6728) ...Public Use 148 13 k. In General. The question what is a public use, so as to be subject to eminent domain, is a "question of law" , and, although deference will be paid to legislative judgment, as expressed in enactment providing for appropriation of property, it will not be conclusive. [7] Eminent Domain 148 196 148 Eminent Domain 148III Proceedings to Take Property and Assess Compensation 148 196 k. Evidence as to Right to Take. A placer mining district, in order to acquire private property by eminent domain, is required to prove that private property is required for a specified purpose and is to be used for a designated public benefit, notwithstanding provision in Placer Mining District Act designating all property required by any district formed under the act in fully carrying out provisions of act, to be a public use. Code Civ.Proc. s 1238 ; Gen.Laws Act 4938a, ...

23. Yel FlgBoard of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 2 of Towns of Ossining and Mt. Pleasant v. Pace College, 27 A.D.2d 87, 276 N.Y.S.2d 162, N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept., December 28, 1966 ...public use. Reversed; motion to dismiss the separate defense granted. EMINENT DOMAIN 47(1) <<. In general. The "doctrine of prior public use" operates to defeat attempts by a condemnor other than the

state itself to condemn land already devoted to public use, unless the legislature expressly or by necessary implication has authorized the particular acquisition in controversy. EMINENT DOMAIN 47(1) <<. In general. The defense of prior public use is available only to property owner who has been granted power to condemn equivalent to that of petitioning condemnor. Education Law, s 404, subd. 2. Id. EMINENT DOMAIN 47(1) <<. In general. ...

24. Yel FlgMontana Talc Co. v. Cyprus Mines Corp., 229 Mont. 491, 748 P.2d 444, 1987 WL 29142, Mont., December 28, 1987 (NO. 87-186) ...public use where the latter use was a more beneficial use than the former? The mere fact that the easement is held by a corporation, and that another corporation takes it to subserve public use, cannot affect the principle so long as a second taking is for the greater public good (citing authority). Nor can the claim of a superior equity of respondent be urged as a sound argument, based upon the fact that the appellants already have appropriated the property for public use. (Citing a case.) 10 We cannot agree that the statute which authorizes lands to be appropriated for a more necessary public use means a different public use in all cases. If the legislature had intended that construction to be put upon the statute, instead of carefully restricting the right 504 to a more necessary public use, they could easily have said a different public use . 10 ...

25. Yel FlgLouisiana Power & Light Co. v. City of Houma, 229 So.2d 202, La.App. 1 Cir., November 17, 1969 (NO. 7800) ...Property once devoted to a public use cannot be diverted therefrom without express authority of the Legislature.' [5] The quoted language from the landmark Ouachita case, above, establishes the rule that a subdivision or agency of the state does not possess authority to expropriate property in public use unless such authority is expressly conferred or necessarily implied from the language of the legislation granting the right to condemn. Appellant maintains it is expressly empowered to take property in public use because the statute in question authorizes the expropriation of 'buildings, transmission lines, stations and substations' . It is argued that 'transmission lines, stations and substations' are by their very nature properties which will always be in public use. ...

26. Red FlgCity of Cleveland v. Board of Tax Appeals, 153 Ohio St. 97, 91 N.E.2d 480, 16 A.L.R.2d 1354, 41 O.O. 176, Ohio, March 01, 1950 (NO. 31802) ...Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2311 k. Public Property in General. (Formerly 371k213 ) Section of the constitution authorizing passage of general laws to exempt public property used exclusively for any public purpose is a limitation on legislative power to enact laws exempting property, and the General Assembly may not exempt from taxation publicly owned property not used

exclusively for any public purposes. Const. art. 12, s 2 . [6] Taxation 371 2311 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2311 k. Public Property in General. (Formerly 371k213 ) The phrase "public property used exclusively for any public purpose" ...

27. C Starr Burying Ground Ass'n v. North Lane Cemetery Ass'n, 77 Conn. 83, 58 A. 467, Conn., July 01, 1904 ...use of the public for the burial of the dead, it may become a public burial ground, and its use a public use, for which the Legislature may lawfully condemn land. 190 Eminent Domain 148 42 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 16 Particular Uses or Purposes 148 42 k. Cemeteries. While the private use of land for purposes of a burial ground by a private corporation may be a public convenience and necessity, it is not strictly a public use justifying condemnation of land for that purpose. 190 Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

28. Yel FlgCity of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles Pac. Co., 31 Cal.App. 100, 159 P. 992, Cal.App. 2 Dist., July 21, 1916 (NO. 1832) ...public interest and necessity require the acquisition, construction or completion, by such county, city and county, or incorporated city or

town, of any proposed public utility, or any public improvement, and that the property described in such resolution or ordinance is necessary therefor, such resolution or ordinance shall be conclusive evidence; (a) of the public necessity of such proposed public utility or public improvement; (b) that such property is necessary therefor, and (c) that such proposed public utility or public improvement is planned or located in the manner which will be most compatible with the greatest public good, and the least private injury: Provided, that said resolution or ordinance shall not be such conclusive evidence in the case of the taking by any county, city and county, or incorporated city 995 ...

29. Yel FlgReading Municipal Airport Authority v. Schuylkill Val. School Dist., 4 Pa.Cmwlth. 300, 286 A.2d 5, Pa.Cmwlth., January 17, 1972 ...use or charges for use and buildings were available for rental by private business entity to persons of its unfettered choosing, property primarily served private entity and not general public using airport and was not exempt from local taxation under statute exempting public property used for public purposes from local taxation. Affirmed. TAXATION 197 <<. Statutory provisions in general. In determining whether exemption may constitutionally be granted under statutes exempting public property used for public purposes from local taxation, use of the property and not use of the proceeds from the property is relevant. 72 P.S. s 5020-204; P.S.Const. art. 8, s

2. TAXATION 213 <<. Public property in general. ...

30. H Vermont Studio Center, Inc. v. Town of Johnson, 188 Vt. 223, 5 A.3d 904, 2010 WL 2636127, 2010 VT 59, Vt., July 02, 2010 (NO. 09-361) ...Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2337 Charitable or Benevolent Institutions, and Property Used for Charitable Purposes in General 371 2341 k. Occupation and use of property. The indefinite-class-of-persons test used to determine whether taxpayer is entitled to public use property tax exemption, which requires that property directly benefits an indefinite class of persons who are part of the public, is intended to distinguish uses that benefit the public from uses that benefit only a selected few. [6] Taxation 371 2341 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2337 Charitable or Benevolent Institutions, and Property Used for Charitable Purposes in General 371 2341 k. Occupation and use of property. ...

31. H City of Smithville v. St. Luke's Northland Hosp. Corp., 972 S.W.2d 416, 1998 WL 184987, Mo.App. W.D., April 21, 1998 (NO. WD 53765) ...public use, for purposes of determining city's authority to condemn hospital, was judicial question for court to decide. [5] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to

Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Whether particular use of property is public use, for purposes of determining municipality's authority to condemn property, is public policy inquiry and is highly dependent on specific facts and circumstances of each particular case. [6] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. Eminent Domain 148 14 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 14 k. Extent of Use or Benefit. Under condemnation law, " public use ...

32. C Norton v. City of Gainesville, 211 Ga. 387, 86 S.E.2d 234, Ga., February 16, 1955 (NO. 18829) ...property to public use, the municipality may be enjoined by any person interested. [3] Dedication 119 57 119 Dedication 119II Operation and Effect 119 56 Use of Property 119 57 k. In General. Where municipality dedicates property to public use, such property may be put to all customary uses within definition of the use. [4] Dedication 119 64 119 Dedication 119II Operation and Effect 119 64 k. Misuser or Diversion. Where municipality dedicates property to public use, any use which is inconsistent or which substantially and materially interferes with use of the property for particular use for which it was dedicated will constitute a misuser or diversion. [5] Municipal Corporations 268 721(1) 268 Municipal

Corporations 268XI Use and Regulation of Public Places, Property, and Works 268XI(C) Public Buildings, Parks, and Other Public Places and Property 268 721 ...

33. H Timmons v. South Carolina Tricentennial Commission, 254 S.C. 378, 175 S.E.2d 805, S.C., July 07, 1970 (NO. 19074) ...Uses or Purposes 148 41 k. Parks and Reservations. Where land being taken by Tricentennial Commission would remain vested in state and where state and its delegated agency were precluded from any use of property other than permanent one as public park by virtue of contract with federal department and statute, taking was permanent in nature and there was no basis for enjoining taking on ground that taking was for a temporary use, notwithstanding that 806 Tricentennial Commission would terminate on specific date. [9] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. Lands cannot be condemned for other than a public use. [10] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. Eminent Domain 148 198(2) 148 Eminent Domain 148III ...

34. H Emerald People's Utility Dist. v. Pacific Power & Light Co., 76 Or.App. 583, 711 P.2d 179, Or.App., December 04, 1985 (NO. CA A30473, E83-1726)

...public utility. The Circuit Court, Douglas County, Don H. Sanders, J., dismissed the complaint, and district appealed. The Court of Appeals, Buttler, P.J., held that public utility districts do not have authority to take existing public or private power generating facilities designated dedicated to public use. Affirmed. 1. Eminent Domain 47(1) <<. In general. Legislature may empower a public body to appropriate private land already devoted to a public use; however, a general power of eminent domain is not sufficient to authorize such a taking; authority must be granted expressly or by necessary implication. 2. Eminent Domain 47(1) <<. In general. ...

35. C City of New Iberia v. Romero, 391 So.2d 548, La.App. 3 Cir., November 12, 1980 (NO. 7906) ...used for any public purpose since at least 1940 was susceptible to acquisitive prescription by defendant who had leased the property from the city since the lease stated that property was not used for public purposes, and fact that another portion of the same property acquired in 1903 was being put to public use did not defeat acquisitive prescription of that portion which was not subject to public use. Affirmed. ADVERSE POSSESSION 9 <<. Property held by municipalities for other than public use. ...

36. H Dickgieser v. State, 153 Wash.2d 530, 105 P.3d 26, 2005 WL 171346, Wash., January 27, 2005 (NO. 74619-2) ...public use, the Court of Appeals reasoned that 3 the logs themselves were not put to a public use; the land was not used for a

public use; the stream revisions were not for a public use (for example, a road or park). Rather, like Manufactured Housing and [ In re ] City of Seattle, [96 Wash.2d 616, 638 P.2d 549 (1981) ], the logging provided a public benefit but was not a public use. 3 Dickgieser, 118 Wash.App. at 447, 76 P.3d 288. "Viewed another way," the court said, "the Department logged this property to produce income and manage its assets. It did not log the property to create an area for public use. Thus, the logging was not a public use." Id. at 447, 76 P.3d 288. 3 Initially, we note that the Department does not dispute that logging of state forest lands is a public use ...

37. H Hoffman Family, L.L.C. v. City of Alexandria, 272 Va. 274, 634 S.E.2d 722, 2006 WL 2638364, Va., September 15, 2006 (NO. 052506) ...public use. Moreover, the record contains manifest evidence of the public purpose of the proposed use, namely, the City's operation of this sewer system component. 8 Finally, we find no merit in Hoffman's argument that the principles enunciated in Phillips v. Foster preclude the City's condemnation of Hoffman's property. There, we held unconstitutional as applied a statute permitting private property owners to condemn for their own use the private property of another. Phillips, 215 Va. at 544, 211 S.E.2d at 94 . 8 In that case, certain developers sought to condemn an easement across adjoining property to provide drainage for their proposed private housing subdivision. Id. at 544, 211 S.E.2d at 94. We focused our review on

the question whether there was a public use of the land to be condemned that predominated over the developers' private use of the land. ...

38. Red FlgTexas Eastern Transmission Corp. v. Wildlife Preserves, Inc., 89 N.J.Super. 1, 213 A.2d 193, N.J.Super.L., August 26, 1965 (NO. L-13684) ...public use but was not precluded from selling those lands and pursuing its laudable purposes on other lands did not raise corporation and its lands to level of 'prior public use' precluding condemnation of those lands. Motion granted. EMINENT DOMAIN 47(1) <<. In general. Doctrine of prior public use is not limited in application to cases wherein condemnee resisting condemnation has power of condemnation itself, but something more must appear than voluntary devotion by condemnee of premises to use which is beneficial to public or which under certain circumstances could be use for which power of eminent domain could properly be authorized by Legislature. EMINENT DOMAIN 47(1) <<. In general. "Public use" which prevents condemnation must be a use to which the public or some portion thereof is legally entitled and to which owner is legally bound. Id. EMINENT DOMAIN 47(1) ...

39. H In re Saratoga Ave. in City of New York, 226 N.Y. 128, 123 N.E. 197, N.Y., April 08, 1919 ...public use, and, if construed to prevent the owner of property

without limit of time from conveying an unincumbered title thereto, it is unconstitutional as taking private property without compensation. 190 Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. When a public corporation having public obligations with power to acquire property by eminent domain acquires the same by purchase to carry out such obligations, it can hold it for such public use with the same right of priority therein that it would have had if it had acquired it pursuant to the condemnation statute. 190 Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 ...

40. Yel FlgWhitehouse v. Tracy, 72 Ohio St.3d 178, 648 N.E.2d 503, 1995 WL 245381, 1995 Ohio- 212, Ohio, May 10, 1995 (NO. 94-1045, 8540) ...property including portion farmed by private farmer. Tax Commissioner appealed. The Supreme Court, Alice Robie Resnick , J., held that farmer's private use of public land was sufficiently incidental that land could be characterized as "used exclusively for a public purpose," for purposes of real property tax exemption. Affirmed . Moyer , C.J., dissented and filed opinion in which Douglas and Cook , JJ., concurred. 1. Taxation 217 That village allowed farmer to farm village land containing water well-field from which village drew water for its residents was insufficient to defeat property's

characterization as "public property used exclusively for a public purpose," within meaning of property tax exemption statute; although farmer was profiting from use of land, village had effectively retained full control over use of property and allowed farmer to farm property ...

41. Yel FlgAmerican Trading Real Estate Properties, Inc. v. Town of Trumbull, 215 Conn. 68, 574 A.2d 796, 1990 WL 64062, Conn., May 15, 1990 (NO. 13811) ...property for public use. 4 Although the trial court did not explicitly define the term public use, the memorandum 801 of decision implicitly reveals that the court held that the defendant could claim immunity from adverse possession only if it could demonstrate actual use of the property as a roadway. The court stressed that "[i]t is not enough for the municipality to hold the property for the public use; something more, that is to say, actual public use, must be shown." (Emphasis in original.) In reaching its conclusion that "the defendant Town of Trumbull has failed to show the strip was used by the public or dedicated for public use after the property was acquired in 1937," the trial court apparently relied upon the factual showing that the roadway was impassable and had never been used for access to the park. ...

42. C Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. Broward County, 421 So.2d 681, Fla.App. 4 Dist., November 03, 1982 (NO. 82-

563) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Under the prior public use doctrine, the property devoted to a public use cannot be taken and appropriated to another or different public use unless the authority to do so has been expressly given by the legislature or may be necessarily implied. [2] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

43. Yel FlgFoeller v. Housing Authority of Portland, 198 Or. 205, 256 P.2d 752, Or., April 29, 1953 ...Public Use 148 14 k. Extent of use or benefit. Term " public use" as used in constitutional provision that private property shall not be taken for "public use" without just compensation means a more intimate relationship between the public and property which has been acquired under power of eminent domain than is denoted by terms such as "public benefit" and "public utility" . ORS Const. art. 1, s 18 . [4] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In general. "Public use" within meaning of constitutional provision that private property shall not be taken for "public use" without just compensation demands that the public's use and occupation of the property be direct, and if someone other than the public uses the property

fact that public will share in benefits does not suffice. ...

44. H Pacific Power and Light Co. v. Surprise Valley Electrification Corp., 985 F.2d 573, 1993 WL 13373, Unpublished Disposition, C.A.9 (Cal.), January 25, 1993 (NO. 89-15524, 89-15713, 89-16010) ...public use, that the body condemning the property be authorized to do so, and that the property to be condemned be necessary to carry out a project required by public interest or necessity. See Cal.Civ.P.Code ss 1240.010-1240.030. We consider these requirements in slightly different order. 2 The City has statutory authority to condemn property for use as a public utility. "The legislative body may acquire private property by condemnation or otherwise when it is necessary to take or damage such property for: . (f) any other purposes authorized by law. " Cal.Gov't Code s 40404 (emphasis added). "Any municipal corporation may acquire, construct, own, operate, or lease any public utility." Cal.Pub.Util.Code s 10002 . 2 ...

45. Yel FlgTown of Harrison v. Westchester County, 13 N.Y.2d 258, 196 N.E.2d 240, 246 N.Y.S.2d 593, N.Y., December 30, 1963 ...property of county was exempt from taxation by town was not res judicata with respect to subsequent action involving question whether certain portions of county-owned airport property, consisting of land

and hangars, were exempt, where hangars were not in existence at time of prior adjudication which concerned tax status for years earlier than those involved in subsequent proceeding. [2] Taxation 371 2315 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2315 k. Property of Local Government or Other Public Corporations. (Formerly 371k217 , 371k17 ) "Held for public use" ...

46. Yel FlgLemon v. Mississippi Transp. Com'n, 735 So.2d 1013, 1999 WL 161328, Miss., March 25, 1999 (NO. 97-IA-01480-SCT, 97-IA-01481-SCT) ...property shall not be taken or damaged for public use, except on due compensation being first made to the owner or owners thereof, in a manner to be prescribed by law; and whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be public shall be a judicial question, and, as such, determined without regard to legislative assertion that the use is public. 7 Section 17 has consistently been interpreted by this Court to require that a court determine whether a taking is for a public use. See Mayor v. Thomas, 645 So.2d 940, 942 (Miss.1994) (whether there is a public use for the property is a judicial question without regard to legislative assertions that the use is public); Texas Gas Transmission Corp. v. Council, 199 So.2d 247, 249 (Miss.1967) ...

47. C David Jeffrey Co. v. City of Milwaukee, 267 Wis. 559, 66 N.W.2d 362, Wis., October 05, 1954

...property only for public use . The underlying consideration in this cause is the character of the use to be made of the property which sec. 66.43, Stats ., permits cities to acquire by eminent domain. Appellants contend that notwithstanding the fact that the public may derive incidental benefits from the application of these statutory provisions, the term public benefit is not synonymous with that of public use , and that the program authorized by the statute is not for a public use as that term has been defined in this state. The courts are not in agreement as to the tests to be applied in determining whether a use is public. Some courts have gone so far in the direction of a liberal construction as to hold that ' public use ' is synonymous with ' public benefit', ' public advantage', ' public interest ', or ' public welfare .' ...

48. C People ex rel. Lawless v. City of Quincy, 395 Ill. 190, 69 N.E.2d 892, Ill., November 20, 1946 (NO. 29687) ...uses, where there was a clear division of the property between the portion used for public purposes and the portion devoted to private use . In People ex rel. Scott v. Ricketts, 248 Ill. 428, 94 N.E. 71, 72, it was held that a park dedicated for the benefit of other property and restricted to the use of the owners of such property or residents thereon, was not devoted to a public use and was not exempt from taxation. The court there said: 'It is not essential to a public use that its benefits should be received 200 by the whole public, or even a large part of it. The benefit may be limited actually to the inhabitants of a small locality; but the use must be in common, and upon the same terms, however few the number

who avail themselves of it. 'A public use, whether for all men or a class, is one not confined to privileged persons. The smallest street is 897 ...

49. Yel FlgJonesboro Area Athletic Ass'n, Inc. v. Dickson, 227 Ga. 513, 181 S.E.2d 852, Ga., April 22, 1971 (NO. 26378) ...property was held by city in proprietary or governmental capacity, whether it had been previously dedicated to public use, whether, if so, public use had been abandoned or property had become unsuitable or inadequate for purpose to which it was dedicated, and whether, if lease was valid, city exercised good faith in cancelling it. Code ss 69-312 , 69-612.2 . [2] Municipal Corporations 268 722 268 Municipal Corporations 268XI Use and Regulation of Public Places, Property, and Works 268XI(C) Public Buildings, Parks, and Other Public Places and Property 268 722 k. Grants of Rights to Use Public Property in General. Charter of City of Jonesboro did not authorize lease to private party of property held by city in its governmental capacity for public use. [3] Municipal Corporations 268 721(3) 268 Municipal Corporations 268XI ...

50. H Bloodgood v. Mohawk & H.R.R. Co., 18 Wend. 9, Lock. Rev. Cas. 118, 1837 WL 2871, 31 Am.Dec. 313, N.Y., 1837 ...uses highly advantageous to the public. On what principle shall a

law, transferring the title from the owner to his more enterprising neighbor, on the payment of a just compensation, be pronounced unconstitutional, if using property beneficially to the public is to be deemed a public use of it? The remark of an eminent jurist, (2 Kent's Comm., 340,) that "it must undoubtedly rest in the wisdom of the legislature to determine when public uses require the assumption of private property; and if they should take it for a purpose not of a public nature, as if the legislature should take the property of A. and give it to B., the law would be unconstitutional and void," ...

51. Yel FlgSFPP, L.P. v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 121 Cal.App.4th 452, 17 Cal.Rptr.3d 96, 2004 WL 1752966, 34 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,066, 04 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7111, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9615, Cal.App. 5 Dist., August 05, 2004 (NO. F043498) ...Property Already Appropriated to Public Use 9 The Law Revision Commission addressed many topics, including the condemnation of property already appropriated to public use: 9 "Existing law permits to a limited extent the acquisition by eminent domain of property already appropriated to public use. The Commission believes, however, that joint use of property appropriated to public use should be encouraged in the interest of the fullest utilization of public land and the least imposition on private ownership. To this end, it recommends that any authorized condemnor be permitted to acquire, for use in common, property already devoted to public use if the joint

uses are compatible or can be made compatible without substantial alteration of the preexisting public use. 9 ...

52. Yel FlgCity of Norton v. Lowden, 84 F.2d 663, C.C.A.10 (Kan.), July 13, 1936 (NO. 1405) ...property for public use inheres in sovereign, is essential to public welfare, and can be neither contracted away nor surrendered. [6] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Power to take private property for public use applies to property already devoted to one public use. [7] Eminent Domain 148 47(5) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use ...

53. H Hallock v. State, 39 A.D.2d 172, 332 N.Y.S.2d 762, N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept., June 01, 1972 ...property in fee rather than appropriating an easement to remove sand and gravel therefrom, constituted an appropriation that was necessary for its purposes 175 and for a public use, and whether the court may review its determination. The Authority is empowered by statute to acquire any property that it finds necessary or convenient to carry out its purposes and '* * * the Authority may find and determine that such property is required for a public use * * *' . ( Public Authorities

Law, s 1007 ; Highway Law, s 30 .) There is no question that the Authority, in its construction of the Blenheim-Gilboa Pumped Storage Power Project 766 was engaged in a construction project dedicated to a public use, and that any materials taken from the appropriated property would be used in the construction project, and thus their use would be for a public purpose. ...

54. Yel FlgGravelly Ford Canal Co. v. Pope & Talbot Land Co., 36 Cal.App. 556, 178 P. 150, Cal.App. 3 Dist., March 21, 1918 (NO. CIV. 1802, SAC. 2741) ...property for public uses, shall be applicable to the provisions of this act." "While the courts have not been in agreement on the precise meaning of the term ' public use,' it has been held, without a single dissenting voice, that it does not lie in the power of a state to authorize the taking of the property of an individual without his consent for the private use of another, even on the payment of full compensation." 10 Ruling Case Law, p. 27. If, therefore, property can be taken only for a public use, either by an individual or corporation, it becomes important to understand what is meant by the term "public use" and upon what condition water may be taken for a public use. The courts are not at one as to what constitutes public use for which property may be taken. ...

55. H Corporation of San Felipe De Austin v. State, 111 Tex. 108, 229 S.W. 845, Tex., April 06, 1921 (NO. 3320) ...Public land granted to the town of San Felipe de Austin for use by

inhabitants as timber and granzing lands by original grant of the Mexican government, confirmed by acts of the Congress of the Republic in 1837 (Laws 1837, p. 21) and 1841 (Laws 1840-41, p. 46), where still so used by the inhabitants of such city, is exempt from state and county taxation under provision of Constitution exempting land devoted to a ' public use'; the land having been impressed with a ' public use' by the Mexican grant confirmed by the acts of the Congress, and the character of the land having undergone no change. 2. TAXATION 183 The municipalities of the state are political subdivisions of the state, and to tax their property devoted to public use amounts to the state taxing itself. 3. TAXATION 183 Property of a municipality devoted to public uses is not taxable. ...

56. Red FlgCity of Toledo v. Jenkins, 143 Ohio St. 141, 54 N.E.2d 656, 28 O.O. 72, Ohio, April 05, 1944 (NO. 29504, 29505) ...public utility unit. Gen.Code, s 3677, subd. 15; s 3939, subd. (22); Const. art. 18, s 4 . [3] Taxation 371 2311 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2311 k. Public Property in General. (Formerly 371k213 ) Statute providing that public property used for a public purpose shall be exempt from taxation must be read in light of constitutional provision exempting from taxation public property used exclusively for any public purpose, and such statute exempts property used

exclusively for public purpose. Gen.Code, s 5351; Const. art. 12, s 2 . [4] Taxation 371 2315 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2315 k. Property of Local Government or Other Public Corporations. (Formerly 371k217 ) Property lawfully owned and controlled by municipal corporation is " public property" ...

57. Red FlgDickgieser v. State, 118 Wash.App. 442, 76 P.3d 288, 2003 WL 22133432, Wash.App. Div. 2, September 16, 2003 (NO. 28730-7-II) ...public schools is a public use. 3 In Manufactured Housing, the court found that maintaining housing for low income and elderly people provided public benefit, but it was not a "public use." Manufactured Hous., 142 Wash.2d at 371-72, 13 P.3d 183. Similarly, the court found that the Westlake Project in Seattle, the goals of which were retailing and public space, was in the public interest and had a beneficial use, but was not a public use. In re City of Seattle, 96 Wash.2d 616, 625-27, 638 P.2d 549 (1981) . 291 3 Likewise, logging state land to fund public schools certainly benefits the public. But unlike the cases involving public utilities and transportation, the Department's activities here were not done for a public use. ...

58. H Fries v. Martin, 154 P.3d 184, 2006 WL 3842113, 2006 UT App 514, Utah App., December 29, 2006 (NO. 20050026-CA) ...public road by the government." ). 3 [3] P 9 The formal vacation

rule applies regardless of whether property was actually used by the public or simply designated for public use in a particular dedication. In Sowadzki v. Salt Lake County, 36 Utah 127, 104 P. 111 (1909) , the Utah Supreme Court specifically compared the abandonment of a public road that had been established by use and the abandonment of a public road that had been established by dedication and found the distinction to be insignificant. See id. at 116. Therefore, property dedicated for public use is considered to be held for public use even if the county does not use it for that purpose, and the formal vacation rule applies. See Henderson, 657 P.2d at 1268, 1270 (holding that property designated for public use was subject to the formal vacation rule, even though the property was "never . ...

59. C Head-Lipscomb-McCormick Co. v. City of Bristol, 127 Va. 669, 105 S.E. 500, Va., September 16, 1920 ...property; that being a question of public policy for the city council. 190 Municipal Corporations 268 221 268 Municipal Corporations 268VI Property 268 221 k. Capacity to Acquire and Hold Property in General. The general rule is that the charter or legislative act is the source of power as to the property rights of municipal corporations, and that when silent the implied power exists to acquire and alienate property. 190 Municipal Corporations 268 225(1) 268 Municipal Corporations 268VI Property 268 225 Sale or Other Disposition of Property 268 225(1) k. In General. ...

60. C Tenneco, Inc. v. Central New York R. Corp., 51 A.D.2d 676, 378 N.Y.S.2d 157, N.Y.A.D. 4 Dept., January

16, 1976 ...public use should not be taken for another public use unless the reasons therefore are special, unusual or peculiar, where the second public use would not interfere with or destroy the public use first acquired, that limitation was not applicable; and that where the easement sought by condemnation would not result in either a limitation or discontinuance of service by the railroad in its use of the subject property, the condemnation would not result in an 'abandonment' of the railroad's property in contravention of the Interstate Commerce Act. Affirmed. APPEAL AND ERROR 169 <<. Necessity of presentation in general. Contention not raised in trial court would not be considered on appeal. COMMERCE 85.6 <<. Certificates and extension or abandonment of lines. ...

61. C Nichols v. Central Virginia Power Co., 143 Va. 405, 130 S.E. 764, 44 A.L.R. 727, Va., November 12, 1925 ...public corporation or body of functionaries from entering illegally on his land is not required to make out a case of destructive trespass or irreparable damage. Injunction will lie to restrain the condemnation of private property for private use. 3. EMINENT DOMAIN Public or Private Use - Charter Provision that Company is a Public Service Corporation. - Regardless of the charter provisions of a company that it is a public service corporation, it is the province of the appellate court to determine the question in the particular case,

whether the use is public or private, for which the land is sought to be taken. 4. EMINENT DOMAIN - Public Use - Definition. ...

62. Red FlgBauer v. Ventura County, 45 Cal.2d 276, 289 P.2d 1, Cal., October 21, 1955 (NO. L.A.23362) ...property, such improvements must follow natural drainage of country or natural stream. [11] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In general. "Public use" within constitutional provision that private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation is a use concerning whole community or promoting general interest in its relation to any legitimate object of government. West's Ann.Const. art. 1, s 14 . [12] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In general. ...

63. C Yadkin County v. City of High Point, 217 N.C. 462, 8 S.E.2d 470, N.C., April 17, 1940 (NO. 233) ...public property and property devoted to a public use as well as private property, is for the General Assembly. [3] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. A general authorization to exercise the power of eminent domain will not

suffice in a case where property already dedicated to a public use is sought to be condemned for another public use which is totally inconsistent with the first or former use, but in such case a specific legislative grant or one of unmistakable intent is required. [4] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use ...

64. C Wesleyville Borough v. Erie County Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 676 A.2d 298, 1996 WL 255389, Pa.Cmwlth., May 16, 1996 (NO. 2396 C.D. 1995) ...used by appellant as opportunity to raise new issues which should have been included in appellant's principal brief. [5] Taxation 371 2315 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2315 k. Property of Local Government or Other Public Corporations. (Formerly 371k217 ) Use of properties owned by municipalities and leased to county for courtrooms, waiting rooms and offices for district justices constituted use for public purpose, and therefore such properties were entitled to public-use exemption from real property taxation. 72 P.S. s 5020-204(a)(5) . [6] Taxation 371 2311 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2311 k. Public Property in General.

(Formerly 371k213 ) ...

65. Yel FlgKelo v. City of New London, Conn., 545 U.S. 469, 125 S.Ct. 2655, 2005 WL 1469529, 60 ERC 1769, 162 L.Ed.2d 439, 73 USLW 4552, 35 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,134, 05 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5466, 2005 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7475, 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 437, 10 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 733, U.S.Conn., June 23, 2005 (NO. 04-108) ...property only if the government owns, or the public has a legal right to use, the property, as opposed to taking it for any public purpose or necessity whatsoever. At the time of the founding, dictionaries primarily defined the noun "use" as "[t]he act of employing any thing to any purpose." 2 S. Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language 2194 (4th ed. 1773) (hereinafter Johnson). The term "use," moreover, "is from the Latin utor, which means 'to use , make use of, avail one's self of, employ, apply, enjoy, etc." J. Lewis, Law of Eminent Domain s 165, p. 224, n. 4 (1888) (hereinafter Lewis). ...

66. Yel FlgPennsylvania Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. City of Philadelphia, 242 Pa. 47, 88 A. 904, Pa., June 27, 1913 ...property appropriated outside the parkway, including plaintiff's property, to the telephone company. [1] The view we take of this case requires us to determine the single question whether the purpose or use for which the city intends to take the plaintiff's land is a public use within the constitutional provision permitting its appropriation under the power of eminent domain. Under our former Constitutions it

was declared that no man's property can be justly taken from him or applied to public use without his consent and just compensation being made. The present Constitution, however, provides that private property shall not be taken or applied to public use without authority of law, and without just compensation being first made or secured. ...

67. C Ward v. City of Jackson, 266 So.2d 910, Miss., October 02, 1972 (NO. 47036) ...used for public purposes,' statute authorizing a municipality holding title to property, which has not been purchased with public funds and has not been used for governmental purposes, to lease same did not authorize city to lease land to private individual for private purpose absent showing that the lease was incidential to use of property for public purpose. Reversed and remanded. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS 722 <<. Grants of rights to use public property in general. ...

68. Yel FlgCity of Palm Bay v. General Development Utilities, Inc., 201 So.2d 912, Fla.App. 4 Dist., August 10, 1967 (NO. 960) ...property of a public service corporation for the purpose of providing the same service under governmental, as opposed to private, auspices Is a public use * * *. ' [6] The problem is more than the mere taking of property already devoted to a public use and devoting it to a different public use. Rather, the property is to be devoted to the same public use. This is normally prohibited. However: ...

69. C Town of Oxford v. Town of Beacon Falls, 183 Conn. 345, 439 A.2d 348, Conn., March 17, 1981 ...used for a public purpose" within the meaning of the tax exemption. 1 FN1. See People ex rel. Lawless v. City of Quincy, 395 Ill. 190, 200, 69 N.E.2d 892 (1946) , where the court, in deciding that an airport was a public use, deduced the following rules as to what constitutes a use for public purposes within the meaning of its tax exemption statutes: "First, if the property is located within the limits of the municipal corporation, and is devoted to the use of the public as represented by the residents of that area, it is being used for public purposes; Second, if the property is located outside the limits of the municipal corporation, it can only be considered as being used for public purposes when it is open on equal terms to use by the public generally, rather than being limited in its use to the inhabitants of the municipal corporation which owns the property." ...

70. H Keegan v. City of Hudson, 23 A.D.3d 742, 803 N.Y.S.2d 279, 2005 WL 2875305, 2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 08181, N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept., November 03, 2005 (NO. 97945) ...Property owner petitioned for review of town's determination condemning his property to alleviate urban blight and construct affordable housing. 3 Holding: The Supreme Court , Appellate Division , Crew III , J.P., held that condemnation of property would serve public use. Determination affirmed. 1. Eminent Domain 13 It is axiomatic that a proper exercise of the power of eminent domain

requires that a public use, benefit or purpose be served by the proposed acquisition. 2. Eminent Domain 18.5 Where a proposed condemnation is for the purpose of constructing housing, a public use is generally found in and of itself if the project will eliminate or prevent slums or blighted areas, even if the property is subsequently developed privately, or the project will provide low-rent housing. 3. Eminent Domain 18.5 ...

71. Yel FlgKelo v. City of New London, 268 Conn. 1, 843 A.2d 500, 2002 WL 32372999, Conn., March 09, 2004 (NO. 16742) ...PUBLIC USE UNDER THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS 9 We next address the principal issue in this appeal, which is the plaintiffs' claim that the trial court improperly concluded that the use of eminent domain for economic development does not violate the public use clauses of the state and federal constitutions. Specifically, the plaintiffs contend that: (1) economic development as contemplated in chapter 132 of the General Statutes is not a public use under the state and federal constitutions; (2) even if economic development is a public use, the condemnations in the present case do not promote sufficient public benefit to pass constitutional muster; and (3) the condemnation of parcels 3 26 and 4A lack a reasonable assurance of future public use because private parties retain control over the parcels' use. We address each contention in turn. A ...

72. H

City of Borger v. Garcia,

290 S.W.3d 325, 2009 WL 1098091, Tex.App.-Amarillo, April 23, 2009 (NO. 07-08-0444-CV) ...property to prevent flooding of other neighborhood property owners, appellees would have stated a claim for a taking that would withstand a plea to the jurisdiction. However, appellees allege no facts that would establish that the City used their property to protect other neighborhood property owners. Much as is the case with appellees' assertion that their property damage arose from a public work, appellees appear to conclude that the City diverted water onto their property based solely on the fact that their property sustained damage while other neighborhood properties did not. Because appellees fail to allege any facts to establish that flood waters were diverted onto their property to protect the property of others, we conclude that appellees have failed to allege a public use for which their property was taken. 4 [17] ...

73. C Newcomb v. Smith, 2 Pin. 131, 1849 WL 1879, 1 Chand. 71, Wis., January Term 1849 ...uses highly advantageous to the public. On what principle shall a law, transferring the title from the owner to his more enterprising neighbor, on the payment of a just compensation, be pronounced unconstitutional, if using property beneficially to the public is to be deemed a public use of it? The remark of an eminent jurist (2 Kent's Com. 340), that 'it must undoubtedly rest in the wisdom of the

legislature to determine when public uses require the assumption of private property; and if they should take it for a purpose not of a public nature, as if the legislature should take the property of A. and give it to B., the law would be unconstitutional and void,' ...

74. Yel FlgBailey v. Myers, 206 Ariz. 224, 76 P.3d 898, 2003 WL 22245402, 409 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 36, Ariz.App. Div. 1, October 01, 2003 (NO. 1 CA-SA 02-0108) ...public benefits must substantially outweigh the private character of the end use so that it may truly be said that the taking is for a use that is "really public." The constitutional requirement of " public use" is only satisfied when the public benefits and characteristics of the intended use substantially predominate over the private nature of that use. 6 P 24 There are many factors that may be considered in evaluating the private or public character of the intended use of property. For example, for what purpose or purposes will the property be used? Will title to the property be held by a public entity? If one or more private parties will own or lease the property, will the property be used for private profit, non-profit or public purposes? Will the end use of the property provide needed public services? ...

75. Yel FlgCounty of Wayne v. Hathcock, 471 Mich. 445, 684 N.W.2d 765, 2004 WL 1724875, Mich., July 30, 2004 (NO. 124070, 124073, 124076, 124071, 124074, 124077, 124072, 124075, 124078) ...Public Use 148 13 k. In General. The exercise of

eminent domain when collective action is needed to acquire land for vital instrumentalities of commerce is consistent with the constitutional " public use" requirement, even though the land is transferred to private entity. M.C.L.A. Const. Art. 10, s 2 . [19] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. The transfer of condemned property to a private entity is consistent with the constitution's "public use" requirement when the private entity remains accountable to the public in its use of that property. M.C.L.A. Const. Art. 10, s 2 . [20] Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In General. ...

76. Yel FlgState ex rel. Washington State Convention and Trade Center v. Evans, 136 Wash.2d 811, 966 P.2d 1252, 1998 WL 785954, Wash., November 12, 1998 (NO. 65607-0) ...property for private use. RCW 8.04.070 requires that a proposed condemnation be necessary for the public use. This court has developed a three-part test to evaluate eminent domain cases. For a proposed condemnation to be lawful, the State must prove that (1) the use is public; (2) the public interest requires it; and (3) the property appropriated is necessary for that purpose. In re City of Seattle, 96 Wash.2d 616, 625, 638 P.2d 549 (1981) (citing King County v. Theilman, 59 Wash.2d 586, 593, 369 P.2d 503 (1962) ). Property owners challenge the present condemnation on the first and

third grounds. They argue that the expansion project is not "for public use" because Hedreen's participation creates an impermissible mix of public and private uses. ...

77. C

23 Am. Jur. 2d Dedication s 61 American Jurisprudence, Second Edition Database updated August 2011 Alan J. Jacobs, J.D. Dedication VI. Operation and Effect of Dedication s 61. Right of dedicatee to control and regulate use ...VI. Operation and Effect of Dedication Topic Summary Correlation Table References s 61. Right of dedicatee to control and regulate use West's Key Number Digest West's Key Number Digest, Dedication k 59.1 60 62 A state or municipality holds dedicated property, not in a proprietary, but in a sovereign or corporate, capacity in trust for the use to which it was dedicated.[FN 1 ] Though much must be left to the discretion of the legislative body as to the best manner of regulating that use, its power of control over such property must be exercised in conformity with the purpose of the dedication.[FN 2] One who dedicates property to a public use necessarily submits to public regulation, and if the public use is local, then to local regulation, unless some superior authority intervenes.[FN 3 ] A public body cannot destroy the trust created by a dedication of land to a specific, limited, and definite public use by diverting the property to some other purpose inconsistent with the restrictions accompanying the dedication.[FN 4 ] For example, a city may not place a highway on land dedicated to public use as a "common," "promenade," or "landing," implying use as

park-like public walking place.[FN 5] Property dedicated to public use generally cannot be alienated[FN 6 ] or leased[FN 7 ] for purposes foreign to the dedication.[FN 8] If property is dedicated to a general public use, such as for a park or square, the legislature or municipality may by proper act designate the particular public use to which the property will be devoted,[FN 9 ] and may change the purpose of dedication.[FN 10] [FN 1] Seltenreich v. Town of Fairbanks, 13 Alaska ... ...3 Sioux City, Iowa, v. Missouri Valley Pipe Line Co., 46 F.2d 819 (N.D. Iowa 1931) [FN 4] Big Sur Properties v. Mott, 62 Cal. App. 3d 99, 132 Cal. Rptr. 835 (1st Dist. 1976) City of Chicago v. Ward, 169 ...

78. Yel FlgWallace v. Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, 302 Ill.App.3d 573, 707 N.E.2d 140, 236 Ill.Dec. 295, 1998 WL 897081, Ill.App. 1 Dist., December 23, 1998 (NO. 1-98-1956) ...Use of Public Buildings and Other Property 268 851 k. Parks and Public Squares and Places. Local Government and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act provides public entities with an affirmative defense against simple negligence claims arising from conditions present on any public property intended or permitted to be used for recreational purposes, regardless of the primary purpose of the property. S.H.A. 745 ILCS 10/3-106 . [7] Municipal Corporations 268 851 268 Municipal Corporations 268XII Torts 268XII(E) Condition or Use of Public Buildings and Other Property 268 851 k. Parks and

Public Squares and Places. ...

79. C

26 Am. Jur. 2d Eminent Domain s 103 American Jurisprudence, Second Edition Database updated August 2011 Laura Dietz, J.D., Glenda K. Harnad, J.D., of the National Legal Research Group, Inc., Alan J. Jacobs, J.D., Jack Levin, J.D., Jeffrey J. Shampo, J.D., Eric Surette, J.D., Lisa J. Zakolski, J.D. Eminent Domain I. Nature and Extent of Power E. Property Subject to Taking 2. Property Devoted to Public Use s 103. Generally ...Levin, J.D., Jeffrey J. Shampo, J.D., Eric Surette, J.D., Lisa J. Zakolski, J.D. I. Nature and Extent of Power E. Property Subject to Taking 2. Property Devoted to Public Use Topic Summary Correlation Table References s 103. Generally West's Key Number Digest West's Key Number Digest, Eminent Domain k 47(1) , (7) Ordinarily, land devoted to one public use cannot be taken for another inconsistent public use unless legislation authorizes such taking.[FN 1 ] However, where the power of eminent domain is being exercised by the sovereign itself, such as the state or the federal government, legislative authority may not be required,[FN 2 ] and property devoted to a public use may be taken by authority of the legislature for a different public use even if the earlier enterprise is thereby wholly destroyed.[FN 3] Under the "prior-public-use doctrine," a municipality has no power to condemn property already dedicated to a public use, absent power conferred by the legislature expressly or by necessary implication.[FN 4 ]

Generally, the prior-public-use doctrine is applicable between entities with equally delegated powers of eminent domain.[FN 5 ] The priorpublic-use doctrine should be limited to those cases involving competing condemnors, as it is for the condemning entity to determine whether privately owned property, although presently used for public benefit, should be condemned for a competing public use.[FN 6 ] The doctrine of prior public use does not clothe the court with power to weigh the communal benefit of the proposed use against the present use of property sought to be condemned, as it is, rather, a rule of law limited to controversies between two entities each possessing a delegated, general power of eminent domain.[FN 7] Observation: The doctrine of prior public use, if applicable, does not depend on whether the prior use was acquired by condemnation or purchase.[FN 8] When a landowner resisting condemnation possesses no delegated, general power of eminent domain, the question of the prior-public-use doctrine does not arise.[FN 9] CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENT Cases: Restricted zone of water authority's new raw water intake works did not practically destroy or materially interfere with river authority's ability to use the lake for hydroelectric power generation, as would require the water authority to demonstrate that its purpose for condemnation of ...

80. Red FlgSt. Charles Parish School Bd. v. P & L Inv. Corp., 674 So.2d 218, 1996 WL 266568, 110 Ed. Law Rep. 500, 952571 (La. 5/21/96), La., May 21, 1996 (NO. 95-C-2571)

...Public Use 119 20(2) k. Knowledge and Consent of Owner, and Nature of Use in General. Owner of privately owned road abutting property of school did not impliedly dedicate such road to public use, despite fact that public used road and parish maintained road; owner neither consented to dedication nor subdivided property at issue into lots, and school board knew that property belonged to owner and had not been dedicated to public use at time school board purchased adjoining property. [19] Dedication 119 20(2) 119 Dedication 119I Nature and Requisites 119 16 Acts Constituting Dedication 119 20 Abandonment to or Acquiescence in Public Use 119 20(2) k. Knowledge and Consent of Owner, and Nature of Use in General. ...

81. C Concord R. R. v. Greely, 17 N.H. 47, 1845 WL 2063, N.H., 1845 ...property of A, and giving it to B as his private property, was an application of it to public uses, no one would contend that such a declaration made that public, which, in its nature and object, was private. 6 Upon the question what is and what is not a public use, various considerations have been urged, both before us and in different parts of the Union. It has been said that property could not be properly alleged to be taken for the public use, unless, when taken, it should belong to the public as owning it; that the words substantially mean, that the property should be changed, by the act of application, and should belong to the community at large. ...

82. Yel FlgE & J Holding Corp. v. Noto, 126 A.D.2d 641, 510 N.Y.S.2d 899, N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept., January 20, 1987 (NO. 4117 E) ...property already devoted to another public use; (2) prior public use doctrine applies to closing of public highway; (3) laws enabling subordinate government agencies to discontinue roadways must be adhered to; and (4) road which was still in active use could not be closed on the grounds that it was useless, abandoned, or no longer necessary. Resolution annulled. 1. Eminent Domain 47(1) <<. In general. General grant of power of eminent domain extended in town law does not empower town to acquire rights in property already devoted to another public purpose where acquisition will interfere with or destroy prior public use. McKinney's Town Law s 64, subd. 2. 2. Eminent Domain 47(6) <<. Appropriating highways, streets, and parks. ...

83. Yel FlgCity of Blue Springs, Mo. v. Central Development Ass'n, 684 S.W.2d 44, 1984 WL 914499, Mo.App. W.D., November 13, 1984 (NO. WD 34848) ...Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In general. Under rule that property already devoted to public use cannot be condemned for different public use, municipality's general statutory right to condemn cannot be escaped by anything short of existing public use of

land. [12] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In general. City had authority to condemn land for purpose of constructing municipally owned 46 water system, even assuming that landowner had taken sufficient actions toward providing water for public so as to render land already devoted to public purpose. [13] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 ...

84. Yel FlgEdens v. City of Columbia, 228 S.C. 563, 91 S.E.2d 280, S.C., January 30, 1956 (NO. 17111) ...property shall not be taken for private use without the consent of the owner, nor for public use without just compensation being first made therefor.' ' public use' means just that and private property cannot be taken except for public use, without the consent of the owner. The following is from Riley v. Charleston Union Station Co., 71 S.C. 457, 51 S.E. 485, 496 : 'It is not easy to give a definition of ' public use' which will be adequate to cover every case that may properly fall within the term, and this case does not call for an attempt to define the term. Some cases take the very broad view that 572 ' public use ' is synonymous with ' public benefit.' A more restricted view, however, would seem to better comport with the due protection of Our controlling decisions are to the effect that

private property against spoliation under the guise of eminent domain. ...

85. Yel FlgVillage of Hicksville v. Lantz, 153 Ohio St. 421, 92 N.E.2d 270, 41 O.O. 424, Ohio, April 26, 1950 (NO. 31905) ...property to a public use has the same effect as an express grant of such property to such a use; and the law requires that there be clear evidence of owner's intention to dedicate such property to such a use; and the same rule applies when a municipal corporation is owner of such property. Gen.Code, s 3714. [6] Dedication 119 20(1) 119 Dedication 119I Nature and Requisites 119 16 Acts Constituting Dedication 119 20 Abandonment to or Acquiescence in Public Use 119 20(1) k. In General. Ordinarily a municipal corporation may use and permit use of its property for a public purpose without thereby indicating an intention to dedicate that property in perpetuity for that public purpose. [7] Dedication 119 20(1) 119 Dedication 119I Nature and Requisites 119 16 Acts Constituting Dedication 119 20 Abandonment to or Acquiescence in Public Use 119 20(1) k. In General. ...

86. C Styles v. Village of Newport, 76 Vt. 154, 56 A. 662, Vt., January 07, 1904 ...Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2315 k. Property of Local Government or Other Public Corporations. (Formerly 371k217 ) A water system of a municipality, used in

furnishing water to the municipality for fire protection and other municipal purposes, and to individual citizens for domestic purposes for a certain compensation, was employed for a public use, within the meaning of V.S. 362 , exempting property so used from taxation. 190 Taxation 371 2315 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2315 k. Property of Local Government or Other Public Corporations. (Formerly 371k217 ) That part of the system so used lying without the corporate limits was likewise exempt. 190 Taxation 371 2315 371 Taxation 371III Property Taxes 371III(F) Exemptions 371III(F)1 In General 371 2315 ...

87. C Cleveland v. City of Detroit, 322 Mich. 172, 33 N.W.2d 747, Mich., September 08, 1948 (NO. 48) ...use by city of realty, sought to be condemned, for subsurface 748 bus terminals for improvement of city's street railway system, was a public use, was judicial. [9] Eminent Domain 148 20(6) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 16 Particular Uses or Purposes 148 20 Railroads 148 20(6) k. Street Railroads. The use of realty, which city sought to condemn for construction thereon of subsurface bus terminals for improvement of city's street railway system, was a "public use." [10] Eminent Domain 148 221 148 Eminent Domain 148III Proceedings to Take Property and Assess Compensation 148 213 Assessment by Jury 148 221 k. Questions for Jury. The question of the necessity of acquiring realty by condemnation for public use is one for jury of

freeholders. [11] Eminent Domain 148 14 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 ...

88. C Community College of Delaware County v. Board of Assessment and Revision of Taxes, Delaware County, 5 Pa.Cmwlth. 487, 290 A.2d 432, Pa.Cmwlth., May 03, 1972 ...property used to conduct public educational program from local taxation. The Commonwealth Court, No. 265 C.D.1971, Rogers, J., held statute governing exemptions from local taxation and providing exemption for 'all other public property used for public purposes' and constitutional provision authorizing it provide exemption only for property publicly owned as well as publicly used rather than exemption for all property used for public ...

89. C Varner v. Martin, 21 W.Va. 534, 1883 WL 3202, W.Va., April 21, 1883 ...property can not be taken with or without compensation for private use. (p. 548.) 1 2. Under our Constitution private property can be taken only for public use, and then only upon just compensation being paid or secured to be paid. (p. 551.) 1 3. Whether private property should be taken for the direct and immediate use of the public is a question for the Legislature to determine, and when so taken and used, the title of the property condemned is not transferred to a private individual or corporation, but remains in the public directly. The courts can not sit in judgment upon the public exigencies, which demand this exercise of the right of eminent domain;

this being in such case solely a question for the Legislature. (p. 552.) 1 ...

90. Yel FlgSachem's Head Ass'n v. Board of Tax Review of Town of Guilford, 190 Conn. 627, 461 A.2d 995, Conn., July 12, 1983 (NO. 11020) ...property owned by specially chartered municipal corporation, and municipal corporation appealed. The Superior Court, New Haven, James P. Doherty, State Referee, reserved matter for advice of Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, Parskey, J., held that: (1) real property located within limits of specially chartered municipal corporation, which was open to inhabitants of corporation and their guests as public beaches, parks, and playground area, but which was not open to other residents of town in which specially chartered municipal corporation was located was being used for public purposes of municipal corporation, but (2) such use did not exempt real property of municipal corporation from taxation by town. Questions answered. 1. Taxation 217 <<. Property of municipal or other public corporations. ...

91. H Worthington v. Columbus, 100 Ohio St.3d 103, 796 N.E.2d 920, 2003 WL 22244776, 2003 -Ohio- 5099, Ohio, October 15, 2003 (NO. 2002-1106) ...public use" rule or doctrine. See, e.g., Las Cruces v. El Paso Elec. Co. (1998), 124 N.M. 640, 954 P.2d 72; Naiman, Judicial Balancing of Uses for Public Property: The Paramount

Public Use Doctrine (1990), 17 B.C.Envtl.Affairs L.Rev. 893, 896; Arena, The Accommodation of "Occupation" and "Social Utility" in Prior Public Use Jurisprudence (1988), 137 U.Pa.L.Rev. 233 . 2 {P 11} Worthington asserts that the constitutional status of home rule precludes application of the prior public use doctrine to preclude it from taking property within its boundaries through eminent domain. We disagree. 3 {P 12} In Blue Ash, the court applied the prior public use doctrine in a case where a city attempted to condemn property it owned outside its corporate limits pursuant to Section 4, Article XVIII, Ohio Constitution , commonly called the Utility 923 Clause. 2 ...

92. C Housing Authority of City of Fort Lauderdale v. State, Dept. of Transp., 385 So.2d 690, Fla.App. 4 Dist., June 18, 1980 (NO. 78-1980) ...property devoted to a public use cannot be taken 691 and appropriated to another or different public use by a condemnor to whom the power of eminent domain has been delegated unless the legislative intent to so take has been manifested in express terms or by necessary implication. This is known as the doctrine of prior public use. Simply stated, the rule denies exercise of the above power of condemnation where the proposed use will destroy an existing public use or prevent a proposed public use unless the authority to do so has been expressly given by the legislature or must necessarily be implied. . . . The doctrine of prior public use stems from the recognition that municipal and many private corporations possess general powers of condemnation delegated by the legislature. ...

93. C Metcalf v. Black Dog Realty, LLC, 200 N.C.App. 619, 684 S.E.2d 709, 2009 WL 3616609, N.C.App., November 03, 2009 (NO. COA08-1561) ...property was dedicated as both "a park and as a site for a Court House and County Offices." As we realize that the public grounds surrounding a courthouse might be used in much the same manner as a public park, we do not necessarily consider these allegations completely contradictory. 15 641 [29] [30] Even if we accept as true the Plaintiffs' allegations that the "[courthouse property] has been used for public purposes-primarily as a public park-for the last 107 years," a county is not bound to continue to use real property in a certain way just because it has used the property in that manner for any particular period of time. All real property owned by a county is by definition "dedicated to public use" simply by virtue of the fact that it is owned by a county. ...

94. H U.S. v. Ambrose, 403 Md. 425, 942 A.2d 755, 2008 WL 441715, Md., February 20, 2008 (NO. 2 SEPT.TERM 2007) ...used by the public" in two statutory provisions defining key terms of s 16-303 (c): the definition of "highway," s 11-127 , and the private property provision, s 21-101.1 (b)(1). Md.Code (1977, 2002 Repl.Vol.), Transportation Article. 1 The District Court has certified the following questions for our consideration: 1 I. Do the terms "

used by the public" contained in the definition of "highway" in s 11-127 and in the private roads provision of s 21-101.1(b)(1) of the Transportation Article of the Maryland Code require the unrestricted right of the public to the use of the highway or private property, as opposed to the fact of use of a highway or private property by the public? 1 ...

95. Yel FlgCity of New Haven v. Town of East Haven, 35 Conn.Supp. 157, 402 A.2d 345, Conn.Super., October 17, 1977 (NO. 151328, 151330, 151329) ...public use." C.G.S.A. s 13b-43 . [5] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. Statute granting city power to take property by eminent domain for industrial park did not expressly or implicitly authorize condemnation of property already devoted to public use. C.G.S.A. s 8-193 . [6] Eminent Domain 148 47(1) 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 44 Property Subject to Appropriation 148 47 Property Previously Devoted to Public Use 148 47(1) k. In General. ...

96. H Dubbs v. Board of Assessment Review of Nassau County, 81 Misc.2d 591, 367 N.Y.S.2d 898, N.Y.Sup., March 19, 1975 ...public was required to pay an admission charge for most functions at coliseum, where county only permitted private interests to use coliseum

for general benefit of public to whom facilities were open, county's residents were obtaining full benefit for which coliseum was intended, and use of coliseum by private promoters was incidental to or coincidental with enjoyment and occupation of coliseum by general public, coliseum was held for public use and thus exempt from taxation. Petition dismissed. TAXATION 186 <<. Property held or used for other than public purpose. When municipally owned property is used for purely private or commercial ends it is taxable. TAXATION 213 <<. Public property in general. ...

97. Red FlgKing v. Wood, Not Reported in Cal.Rptr.2d, 2002 WL 15892, Not Officially Published, Cal.App. 1 Dist., January 08, 2002 (NO. A092363) ...Public Use 119 20(2) k. Knowledge and Consent of Owner, and Nature of Use in General. For a fee owner to negate a finding of intent to dedicate based on uninterrupted public use for more than five years, he must either affirmatively prove that he has granted the public a license to use his property or demonstrate that he has made a bona fide attempt to prevent public use. [16] Dedication 119 20(2) 119 Dedication 119I Nature and Requisites 119 16 Acts Constituting Dedication 119 20 Abandonment to or Acquiescence in Public Use 119 20(2) k. Knowledge and Consent of Owner, and Nature of Use in General. Whether owner's efforts to halt public use of his property are adequate to prevent implied dedication depends on the means the owner uses in relation to character of the property and extent of

public use . [17] Dedication 119 45 119 Dedication 119I Nature and Requisites 119 45 ...

98. C Loughbridge v. Harris, 42 Ga. 500, 1871 WL 2443, Ga., January Term 1871 ...public use, and provision for just compensation has been made, yet this is not a power which the Legislature can delegate to individuals, to erect mills or manufactories anywhere at their option, and in their judgment take private property for their use. 190 Eminent Domain 148 11 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 6 Delegation of Power 148 11 k. To individual. The power to appropriate private property for public use, conferred by the constitution upon a state legislature, cannot be delegated to individuals. 190 Eminent Domain 148 13 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 12 Public Use 148 13 k. In general. The law of eminent domain will not authorize the taking of private property for any purpose other than that of public use. 190 Eminent Domain 148 37 148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 ...

99. C Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Alcott, 260 Ark. 225, 539 S.W.2d 432, Ark., July 12, 1976 (NO. 76-79) ...public use. The Chancery Court, White County, John Jernigan, Chancellor, enjoined State Highway Commission from any further construction on or use of the tract involved, and the

Commission appealed. The Supreme Court, Holt, J., held that taking for purpose of restoring public access to adjacent parcel which was landlocked as result of recent construction of a highway was not for a public use despite contention that the taking would substantially reduce right-of-way costs. Affirmed. EMINENT DOMAIN 13 <<. In general. Private property can be taken under the power of eminent domain only for a public use. EMINENT DOMAIN 19 <<. Highways or other roads or ways. ...

100.

Parker v. Com., Not Reported in S.E.2d, 2008 WL 1944141, Va.App., May 06, 2008 (NO. 1166-07-1) ...Property Open to Public Use 3 Parker also argues the drug transactions did not take place on public property or property open to public use as required by Code s 18.2-255.2 . 3 It is undisputed that the property on which the drug transactions took place was private property owned by the Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority. As we recognized in Smith v. Commonwealth, 26 Va.App. 620, 496 S.E.2d 117 (1998) , though, the statute is not limited to public property. "If the General Assembly had intended to restrict application of the law to public property only, it would not have included the words 'or any property open to public use.' " Id. at 625, 496 S.E.2d at 119 . 3 Parker contends this property was not open to public use because persons on the property could be cited for trespassing and

because there was no evidence this was a place children would congregate. ...

Westlaw Delivery Summary Report for 1,IP POOL Your Search: property for public use