United States v. Am. Pumice Co., 404 F.2d 336 (9th Cir. 1968). · Go Syfert
United States v. Am. Pumice Co., 404 F.2d 336 (9th Cir. 1968). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Hancock County Land Acquisitions, LLC, Southeastern Argive Investments, LLC, Tax Matters Partner (tax, 2026-03-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hancock County Land Acquisitions, LLC, Southeastern Argive Investments, LLC, Tax Matters Partner
Tax Ct. · 2026 · confidence medium
Pumice Co., 404 F.2d 336, 336 (9th Cir. 1968) (per curiam) (re- jecting claim that mineral properties are rarely comparable because of differences in quantity and quality of minerals); Ranch Springs, 164 T.C. at 149; J L Mins., T.C.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ranch Springs, LLC, Ranch Springs Investors, LLC, Tax Matters Partner
Tax Ct. · 2025 · confidence medium
Pumice Co., 404 F.2d 336, 336 (9th Cir. 1968) (rejecting claim that mineral properties are rarely com- parable due to differences in quantity and quality of minerals); see J L Minerals, T.C.
cited Cited "see" United States v. 22.80 Acres of Land, More or Less, in the County of San Benito, State of California
9th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. 237,500 Acres of Land, 236 F.Supp. 44 (S.D.Cal.1964), aff'd in relevant part, United States v. American Pumice Co., 404 F.2d 336 (9th Cir.1968).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,
v.
AMERICAN PUMICE COMPANY, Appellee
20290.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Nov 15, 1968.
404 F.2d 336
S. Billingsley Hill (argued), A. Donald Mileur, Clyde O. Martz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Roger Marquis, Lands Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for appellant., Hodge L. Dolle (argued), of Hansen & Dolle, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee., P. S. Seymour-Heath, in pro. per.
Barnes, Duniway, Ely, Per Curiam.
Cited by 9 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

The United States appeals from the judgment in favor of American Pumice Company in a condemnation case. United States v. 237,500 Acres of Land, S.D.Cal.1964, 236 F.Supp. 44. The appeal relates only to the rulings of the District Court in that part of its findings and opinion headed “Valuation” and appearing at 236 F.Supp. at 49-55. We affirm for the reasons stated by the District Court, but with certain qualifications. At page 51, the court said: “It is difficult to see how pumice claims can be comparable to one another unless adjacent or nearly so, as the quantity, quality, mining costs and access to market vary with each property.” We cannot accept, as a valid general rule, the requirement that the comparables be “adjacent, or nearly so.” There may be cases where quite distant properties can be shown to be comparable in an economic or market[*337] sense, due allowance being made for variables such as those mentioned by the court. Here, however, no showing of such comparability was made. We also find it unnecessary to decide whether we agree or disagree with the views expressed by Judge Carter in United States v. Land in Dry Bed of Rosamond Lake, S.D.Cal.1956, 143 F.Supp. 314.

Affirmed