(a) Animals or eggs affected by or exposed to disease, and materials required to be destroyed because of being contaminated by or exposed to disease shall be appraised by an APHIS employee and a representative of the State jointly, or, if the State authorities approve, by an APHIS employee alone.
(b) The appraisal of animals shall be based on the fair market value and shall be determined by the meat, egg production, dairy or breeding value of such animals. Animals may be appraised in groups providing they are the same species and type and providing that where appraisal is by the head each animal in the group is the same value per head or where appraisal is by the pound each animal in the group is the same value per pound.
(c) Appraisals of animals shall be reported on forms furnished by APHIS. Reports of appraisals shall show the number of animals of each species and the value per head or the weight and value by pound.
(d) Appraisals of materials shall be reported on forms furnished by APHIS. Reports of appraisals of materials shall, when practicable, show the number, size or quantity, unit price, and total value of each kind of material appraised.
(e) Indemnity for eggs required to be destroyed due to an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza will be based on the fair market value of the eggs, as determined by an appraisal. Appraisals of eggs shall be reported on forms furnished by APHIS. The amount of indemnity paid, together with the amount for net salvage the owner or contractor received, if any, shall not exceed the appraised fair market value of the eggs.
[28 FR 5935, June 13, 1963, as amended at 35 FR 13981, Sept. 3, 1970; 36 FR 25217, Dec. 30, 1971; 56 FR 51974, Oct. 17, 1991; 68 FR 6343, Feb. 7, 2003; 81 FR 6750, Feb. 9, 2016]
Notes of Decisions
Julius Goldman's Egg City v. The United States, 697 F.2d 1051 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
· cites it 3× “” 9 C.F.R. § 53.3 (b) (1975). The Court of Claims has stated on numerous occasions and in particular in its denial of summary judgment in Julius Goldman’s Egg City, supra, at 1100-01, that the Secretary’s determination of fair market value [is] to be upheld unless it is found to…”
Julius Goldman's Egg City v. United States, 214 Ct. Cl. 345 (Ct. Cl. 1977).
· cites it 3× “With that declaration the Government assumed responsibility for control of the disease and payment of indemnities pursuant to 9 C.F.R. § 53.3 (b) 1 to cover the cost of destroying infected or exposed flocks and cleaning and disinfecting premises.”
Wright v. United States, 19 Cl. Ct. 590 (Ct. Cl. 1990).
· cites it 7× “9 C.F.R. § 53.3 (b) (1984). Despite these regulations, the USDA instructed its expert to evaluate the birds on their fair market value as exhibition birds.”
Cebe Farms, Ind. v. United States, 83 Fed. Cl. 491 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“Plaintiffs cite 9 C.F.R. §§ 53.3 , 53.8 (2003) as money-mandating regulations that require “the payment of an indemnity for the destruction of Cebe's chickens and eggs equal to the value set forth in the official appraisal____" Compl.”
Wright v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 819 (Ct. Cl. 1988).
· cites it 2× “A similar appraisal provision appears in 9 C.F.R. § 53.3 . Plaintiffs rejected the offer of compensation as inadequate.”
Yancey v. United States, 10 Cl. Ct. 311 (Ct. Cl. 1986).
“] The regulations also provide that animals and materials required to be destroyed “shall be appraised by a Veterinary Services employee”, 9 C.F.R. § 53.3 (a), and that the USDA will not allow any claim arising out of the destruction of animals and materials “unless they shall…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.