Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { ?s ?p "United States v. Willow River Power Co., 324 U.S. 499 (1945) is a 1945 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court involving the question whether the United States was liable under the Fifth Amendment for a “taking” of private property for a public purpose when it built a dam on navigable waters that raised the water level upstream to lessen the head of water at a power company’s dam, thereby decreasing the production of power by the company’s hydroelectric turbines. The Court’s opinion is notable because it asks the question whether the courts will provide a remedy because a property right has been invaded or a property right exists because the courts will enforce it. This is a reformulation of the Euthyphro dilemma found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro."@en }
Showing triples 1 to 2 of
2
with 100 triples per page.
- United_States_v._Willow_River_Power_Co. abstract "United States v. Willow River Power Co., 324 U.S. 499 (1945) is a 1945 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court involving the question whether the United States was liable under the Fifth Amendment for a “taking” of private property for a public purpose when it built a dam on navigable waters that raised the water level upstream to lessen the head of water at a power company’s dam, thereby decreasing the production of power by the company’s hydroelectric turbines. The Court’s opinion is notable because it asks the question whether the courts will provide a remedy because a property right has been invaded or a property right exists because the courts will enforce it. This is a reformulation of the Euthyphro dilemma found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro.".
- Q7893522 abstract "United States v. Willow River Power Co., 324 U.S. 499 (1945) is a 1945 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court involving the question whether the United States was liable under the Fifth Amendment for a “taking” of private property for a public purpose when it built a dam on navigable waters that raised the water level upstream to lessen the head of water at a power company’s dam, thereby decreasing the production of power by the company’s hydroelectric turbines. The Court’s opinion is notable because it asks the question whether the courts will provide a remedy because a property right has been invaded or a property right exists because the courts will enforce it. This is a reformulation of the Euthyphro dilemma found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro.".