St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District v. Violet Dock Port, Inc.
Louisiana Supreme Court
239 So. 3d 243 (2018)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District (the port) (plaintiff) was a state-operated public port in Louisiana that handled several types of cargo, including metals and minerals. The port was essential to national and international commerce. For many years, the port’s cargo-handling facilities experienced increasing demand, and customers requested additional space and a liquid-cargo facility. The port identified 75 acres of land along the Mississippi River (the property) that belonged to Violet Dock Port, Inc. (Violet) (defendant) as the most suitable site to expand the port’s facilities. Violet’s property was used for berthing and mooring ships, and Violet had a contract with the United States Navy to layberth and service oceangoing ships. After the port’s negotiations to purchase the property from Violet failed, the port initiated an expropriation proceeding. During trial, the court credited the port’s lay witnesses, finding that the expropriation was for a public purpose. Based on the property’s current use, the trial court found $16 million to be just compensation. The court of appeal affirmed. The Louisiana Supreme Court granted review. Violet argued that the expropriation violated the state constitution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crichton, J.)
Dissent (Weimer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.