The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

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

P had, under express authority from the State of Pennsylvania, expended large sums of money in improving the Monongahela River, by means of locks and dams; and that the particular lock and dam in controversy were built not only by virtue of this authority from the State of Pennsylvania, but also at the instance and suggestion of D. Because of these improvements, the Monongahela River, which theretofore was only navigable for boats of small tonnage, and at certain seasons of the year, now carries large steamboats at all seasons, and an extensive commerce by means thereof. D got authority from Congress to take over P’s lock and dam. Voluntary negotiations failed, and D decided to condemnation of the property under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. After the trial, P was awarded the value of the lock and dam but was not given the value for its franchise to collect tolls. P appealed.

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

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

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