United States v. Cors
Encyclopedia
United States v. Cors 337 U.S. 325 (1949) is a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the Merchant Marine Act of 1936
and the Takings clause of the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
at auction, and after paying both the purchase price, and conducting repairs, he had spent $8,574.78 on the boat. Months later in October 1942, the War Shipping Administration
requisitioned the tug for use in the war effort
, offering Cors $9,000.
The Merchant Marine Act contained a clause that, while awarding the "just compensation
" for the requisition, "in no case shall the value of the property taken or used be deemed enhanced by the causes necessitating the taking or use." In the context of the war effort, the value of the ship at issue was tied to the increased value of the ship caused by the war itself. The Administration argued that this clause prevented the value of the ship that was due to the war effort from being required as part of the just compensation.
Cors argued that this clause varied the understanding of just compensation in the 5th amendment's taking's clause, and was unconstitutional. Cors relied on Monongahela Navigation Co. v. United States, 148 U.S. 312 for this proposition.
wrote the opinion, the Court rejected Cors' arguments, and the judgment of the lower court. In its reversal, the Court indicated that market value, while relevant in some just compensation cases, was not the only yardstick available. Stating "[i]t is not fair that the government be required to pay the enhanced price which its demand alone has created", the Court rejected the pure market value test.
Merchant Marine Act of 1936
The Merchant Marine Act of 1936 is a United States federal law. Its purpose is "to further the development and maintenance of an adequate and well-balanced American merchant marine, to promote the commerce of the United States, to aid in the national defense, to repeal certain former legislation,...
and the Takings clause of the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Background
The respondent Cors had purchased a tugboatTugboat
A tugboat is a boat that maneuvers vessels by pushing or towing them. Tugs move vessels that either should not move themselves, such as ships in a crowded harbor or a narrow canal,or those that cannot move by themselves, such as barges, disabled ships, or oil platforms. Tugboats are powerful for...
at auction, and after paying both the purchase price, and conducting repairs, he had spent $8,574.78 on the boat. Months later in October 1942, the War Shipping Administration
War Shipping Administration
The War Shipping Administration was a World War II emergency war agency of the US Government, tasked to purchase and operate the civilian shipping tonnage the US needed for fighting the war....
requisitioned the tug for use in the war effort
World War II
World War II, or the Second World War , was a global conflict lasting from 1939 to 1945, involving most of the world's nations—including all of the great powers—eventually forming two opposing military alliances: the Allies and the Axis...
, offering Cors $9,000.
Arguments and analysis
Cors accepted 75% of the Administration's compensation amount amount and sued for an additional $20,000, as he was permitted to do by section 902(d) of the Merchant Marine Act (codified at ). For purposes of the case, the boat's original cost was estimated to be $45,000; its replacement cost, $56,000; and its present value $9,000. The Court also acknowledged that the improvements made to the ship had a market value higher than the amount Cors expended, largely because he oversaw repairs himself.The Merchant Marine Act contained a clause that, while awarding the "just compensation
Just compensation
Just Compensation is required to be paid by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when private property is taken for public use...
" for the requisition, "in no case shall the value of the property taken or used be deemed enhanced by the causes necessitating the taking or use." In the context of the war effort, the value of the ship at issue was tied to the increased value of the ship caused by the war itself. The Administration argued that this clause prevented the value of the ship that was due to the war effort from being required as part of the just compensation.
Cors argued that this clause varied the understanding of just compensation in the 5th amendment's taking's clause, and was unconstitutional. Cors relied on Monongahela Navigation Co. v. United States, 148 U.S. 312 for this proposition.
Decision
In a decision, in which Justice DouglasWilliam O. Douglas
William Orville Douglas was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. With a term lasting 36 years and 209 days, he is the longest-serving justice in the history of the Supreme Court...
wrote the opinion, the Court rejected Cors' arguments, and the judgment of the lower court. In its reversal, the Court indicated that market value, while relevant in some just compensation cases, was not the only yardstick available. Stating "[i]t is not fair that the government be required to pay the enhanced price which its demand alone has created", the Court rejected the pure market value test.