Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

 The constitutional requirement of just compensation cannot be reduced to a formula or expressed in inexorable rules. See United States v. Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Navigation Co., 338 U.S. 396, 402, 70 S. Ct. 217, 94 L. Ed. 195, 115 Ct. Cl. 835 (1949) ('Perhaps no warning has been more repeated than that the determination of value cannot be reduced to inexorable rules.'); United States v. Cors, 337 U.S. 325, 332, 69 S. Ct. 1086, 93 L. Ed. 1392, 113 Ct. Cl. 692 (1949) ('The Court in its construction of the constitutional provision has been careful not to reduce the concept of 'just compensation' to a formula.'). The requirement of just compensation 'derives as much content from the basic equitable principles of fairness, as it does from technical concepts of property law.' United States v. Fuller, 409 U.S. 488, 490, 93 S. Ct. 801, 35 L. Ed. 2d 16 (1973) (internal citation omitted). Courts have determined just compensation according to practical rules that work substantial justice in the ordinary case but may be subject to exception when warranted by the circumstances. Cors, 337 U.S. at 332 ('The Court in an endeavor to find working rules ...

Register or login to access full content