U.S. Code » Title 33 » Chapter CHAPTER 26— WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— RESEARCH AND RELATED PROGRAMS

33 U.S.C. § 10

PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION; NO REGULATORY AUTHORITY.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 33 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a)Access to Private Property.—Nothing in this Act—“(1) requires any private property owner to allow public access (including Federal, State, or local government access) to the private property; or“(2) modifies the application of any provision of Federal, State, or local law with regard to public access to or use of private property, except as entered into by voluntary agreement of the owner or custodian of the property.“(b)Liability.—Establishment of the Region does not create any liability, or have any effect on any liability under any other law, of any private property owner with respect to any person injured on the private property.“(c)Recognition of Authority to Control Land Use.—Nothing in this Act modifies the authority of Federal, State, or local governments to regulate land use.“(d)Participation of Private Property Owners Not Required.—Nothing in this Act requires the owner of any private property located within the boundaries of the Region to participate in any land conservation, financial or technical assistance, or other programs established under this Act.“(e)Purchase of Land or Interest in Land From Willing Sellers Only.—Funds appropriated to carry out this Act may be used to purchase land or interests in land only from willing sellers.“(f)Manner of Acquisition.—All acquisitions of land under this Act shall be made in a voluntary manner and shall not be the result of forced takings.“(g)Effect of Establishment.—“(1)In general.—The boundaries of the Region represent the area within which Federal funds appropriated for the purpose of this Act may be expended.“(2)Regulatory authority.—The establishment of the Region and the boundaries of the Region do not provide any regulatory authority not in existence immediately before the enactment of this Act [Oct. 16, 2006] on land use in the Region by any management entity, except for such property rights as may be purchased from or donated by the owner of the property (including public lands donated by a State or local government).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1939–2008 · leading case: Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981). · cites it 2× “272, 289 ; 33 U. S. C. § 10 ; 43 U. S. C. § 931 . Rather, the ownership of land under navigable waters is an incident of sovereignty.”
New Orleans S.S. Ass'n v. Plaquemines Port, Harbor & Terminal Dist., 874 F.2d 1018 (5th Cir. 1989). · cites it 5× “33 U.S.C. § 10 NOSA argues that the Port’s fees violate the statute admitting Louisiana to the United States.”
State v. Barras, 615 So. 2d 285 (La. 1993). “452; Yiannopoulos, supra, § 58; 33 U.S.C. § 10 . Regulation of fishing and shellfishing is under the exclusive control of the Wildlife and Fisheries Commission.”
Kliebert Educ. Trust v. Watson Marines Serv., Inc., 454 So. 2d 855 (La. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “Secondly, it is asserted by Watson Marine, Inc. that state legislation regulating the erection and maintenance of buildings and improvements in navigable waterways in Louisiana is unconstitutional because the United States Congress, pursuant to the Commerce Clause of the United…”
Wilder v. Placid Oil Co., 611 F. Supp. 841 (W.D. La. 1985). “Further, it is interesting to speculate that if the boat had caused injury in this case, plaintiffs might very well have petitioned this Court for limitation of liability.”
State v. El Rito Transp. Co., 190 So. 803 (La. 1939). “§ 5251, 33 U.S. C.A. § 10, Congress ordained: “ ‘All the navigable rivers and waters in the former Territories of Orleans and Louisiana shall be and forever remain public highways.”
Wood Marine Serv., Inc. v. City of Harahan, 858 F.2d 1061 (5th Cir. 1988). “The national government also recognizes the importance of the Mississippi and its tributaries. Louisiana was admitted to the Union upon the condition that “[a]ll the navigable rivers and waters in the Territory of Orleans and Louisiana shall be and forever remain public highways.”
Plaquemines Port, Harbor & Terminal Dist. v. Fed. Mar. Comm'n, 838 F.2d 536 (D.C. Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “In a supplemental brief, NOSA raises additional statutory arguments based on 33 U.S.C. § 10 (1982), the statute admitting Louisiana to the Union, and the Harbor Development and Navigation Improvement Act of 1986.”
Crescent Towing & Salvage Co. v. Ormet Corp., 720 So. 2d 628 (La. 1998). “20, 1811, codified 33 U.S.C. § 10 , it conditioned statehood on the proviso that “[a]ll the navigable rivers and waters in the Territory of Orleans and Louisiana shall be and forever remain public highways.”
Stetzer v. Logistec of Connecticut, Inc., 547 F.3d 459 (2d Cir. 2008). “Petitioner argued that Judge Sutton had mistakenly used 33 U.S.C. § 10 (c) instead of § 10(a) to determine petitioner's weekly wage; the BRB agreed with petitioner and increased the weekly wage.”
Wood Marine Serv., Inc. v. Bd. of Commissioners, 653 F. Supp. 434 (E.D. La. 1986). “The claim advanced by Wood Marine is that the operative effect of the Harahan ordinance is to prohibit the unloading of interstate cargoes on the batture, which is contrary to the federal policy of commerce on the river, as well as the free flow of commerce between the states.…”
WOOD MARINE SERV. v. East Jefferson Levee Dist., 653 F. Supp. 434 (E.D. La. 1986). “The claim advanced by Wood Marine is that the operative effect of the Harahan ordinance is to prohibit the unloading of interstate cargoes on the batture, which is contrary to the federal policy of commerce on the river, as well as the free flow of commerce between the states.…”
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.