Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
|service=YouTube | |service=YouTube | ||
|id=568uCCi14lA | |id=568uCCi14lA | ||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Video | |||
|service=YouTube | |||
|id=LUD24oJNoJw | |||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:57, April 23, 2024
| Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon | |
| Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
|---|---|
| Citation | 260 U.S. 393 |
| Date decided | December 11, 1922 |
| Appealed from | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Facts
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. = "Penn" = owner of a parcel rich in sub-surface coal = a coal-mining company
- In 1878, Penn deeded the surface rights to Mahon while retaining the right to mine sub-surface minerals
- The deed stipulated that Mahon would accept the risks associated with Penn's coal mining activities
- In spite of the risks spelled out in the deed, Mahon built a house on the land subject to coal-mining activities
- In 1921, Pennsylvania enacted the Kohler Act (which prohibited coal mining that might threaten any residential structure above land)
Procedural History
- Mahon sued Penn seeking an injunction against Penn in accordance with the newly-passed Kohler Act
- Mahon lost in the court of common pleas in Pennsylvania.
- Mahon won in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Issues
Is the Kohler Act's prohibition on mining coal below residences a taking?
Holding
Oliver Holmes : A regulation that goes too far constitutes a taking & requires just compensation.
The Kohler Act goes beyond the state's police power.Judgment
Reversed
Rule
Resources
