|
''Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States'', , is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that it was possible for government-induced, temporary flooding to constitute a "taking" of property under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, such that compensation could be owed to the owner of the flooded property. The case was brought by an Arkansas state agency, alleging that federal flood control practices along the Black River had damaged valuable timber on state-owned lands. The Commission's lawsuit was supported by advocates for property rights, as well as by fish, forestry and wildlife groups. In opposition, the federal government cited the concern that an adverse ruling could expose it to massive liability for its nationwide flood control efforts. The Court's decision revitalized the Arkansas agency's lawsuit, which had been reversed on appeal after a $5.7 million judgment had been entered in its favor against the U.S. government. The Supreme Court restricted its holding to the issue of whether temporary flooding was categorically excluded from qualifying as a taking, leaving to the lower appellate court to review the remaining legal issues and merits of the judgment on remand. ==Background of the case== The case arose from the management of Clearwater Dam by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps followed a water control plan under which it released water from the dam at rates depending on the season. Between 1993 and 2000, however, the Corps deviated from this plan at the request of farmers, by releasing water during a period that extended into the timber-growing season of the Dave Donaldson Black River Wildlife Management Area, which is owned and managed by the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, an Arkansas state agency.〔''Arkansas Game and Fish Commission'', 568 U.S. at ___ (slip op., at 2-4).〕 The Commission sued the United States, arguing that the temporary flooding of its Management Area, and consequent damage of valuable timber, constituted a taking of property for which it was entitled to compensation under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. The Court of Federal Claims ruled in favor of the Commission and awarded it $5.7 million for the lost timber and the cost of reforesting.〔Summarized at 568 U.S. at ___ (slip op., at 4-6); original decision at ''Arkansas Game and Fish Comm'n v. United States'', 87 Fed. Cl. 594 (2009).〕 The ruling was reversed on appeal by a divided panel of the Federal Circuit, on the basis that there could be no takings claim unless the flooding was "permanent or inevitably recurring."〔Summarized at 568 U.S. at ___ (slip op., at 6); original decision at ''Arkansas Game and Fish Comm'n v. United States'', 637 F. 3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2011).〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|