Valuation, depreciation and the rate base

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 174667931X

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-119897

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Grunsky, Carl Ewald http://d-nb.info/gnd/10180959X

Title:: Valuation, depreciation and the rate base

Edition:: 2. ed., revised and extended

Place of publication:: New York

Publisher:: Wiley

Year of publication:: 1927

Scope:: X, 500 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2021

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Chapter X. Notes on the determination of the value of real estate in eminent domain proceedings and for rate-fixing purposes

Collection:: Economics Books

198 VALUATION, DEPRECIATION AND THE RATE-BASE the value of the islands having been found to be $300 aside from any consideration of their value for boom purposes and $9058.33 due to their adaptability for this special use. The Court granted a motion for a new trial, unless the owner would consent to accept $5500. This amount was acceptable to the owner and judgment for this amount was entered in his favor. The Boom Company then appealed. The Court is perhaps a little over-confident in saying that the market value can be readily estimated. In all other respects the statement is clear and logical. The proposition is being generally recognized by the courts that, when the right of eminent domain is exercised, the ques- tion to be considered is What is the value of the property for the most advantageous uses to which it may be applied ?” See Goodin 7s. Cincinnati and Whitewater Canal Co. (18 Ohio St. 169). Young vs. Harrison (17 Ga. 30). U.S. vs. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co. (229 U.S. 53, 76). In this last-named case referring to the award of special value for canal and lock purposes it was said: “ The exception taken to the inclusion as an element of value of the availability of these parcels of land for lock and canal purposes must be overruled. That this land had a prospective value for the purpose of constructing a canal and lock parallel with those in use had passed beyond the region of the purely conjectural or speculative. That one or more additional parallel canals and locks would be needed to meet the increasing demands of lake traffic was an immediate probability. This land was the only land available for the purpose.” See also Shoemaker vs. U.S. (147 U.S. 282). In the case of “San Diego Land and Town Co. vs. George Neale ef al” (78 Cal. 63, 68; 30 Pac. Rep. 372; 3 L. R. A. 372) the majority of the Court says: “ The consensus of the best-considered cases is that for the purposes in hand the value to be taken is the market value, by

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Valuation, depreciation and the rate base

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation