Acerca de este libro
Mi biblioteca
Libros en Google Play
§ 1. Purposes of valuation.
2. Valuation for public purchase.
3. Valuation for rate purposes.
4. Valuation dependent on purpose.
5. Same subject-Report of Committee National Association of Rail-
way Commissioners.
6. Same subject-Report to Massachusetts Joint Board on N. Y., N. H.
& H. R. R.
7. Value for taxation and for rate purposes.
8. Tax and rate purpose-Nebraska Supreme Court in Bee Building
Co. Case, 1902.
9. Tax and rate purpose-District Judge McPherson in St. Louis &
S. F. R. Co. Rate Case, 1909.
10. Tax and rate purpose Arkansas Railroad Rate Cases, 1911.
11. Value for rate purpose and for public purchase.
12. Capital value and rate and purchase value.
CHAPTER II
FAIR VALUE FOR RATE PURPOSES
$20. Earlier decisions.
21. Justice Brewer in Union Pacific Railway Cases, 1894—No hard and
fast rule of valuation.
22. Circuit Judge Ross in San Diego Land and Town Case, 1896-
Present value, not cost, the true basis.
23. Circuit Judge Thayer in Kansas City Stock-Yards Case, 1897-Cost
plus appreciation in value.
24. Justice Harlan in Smyth v. Ames, 1898-Fair value of property used
and how ascertained.
25. Justice Harlan in San Diego Land and Town Case, 1899-Reasonable
value at time used.
26. Justice Holmes in San Diego Land and Town Case, 1903—Reasonable
§ 27. Circuit Judge Morrow in Spring Valley Water Case, 1903-Reason-
able value at time used.
28. Justice Peckham in San Joaquin Irrigation Case, 1904-Present
value.
29. Columbus, Ohio, Electricity Rate Case, 1906-Fair present value of
tangible and intangible property.
30. Justice Peckham in Consolidated Gas Case, 1909-Fair value gener-
ally includes appreciation.
31. Iowa Supreme Court in Cedar Rapids Gas Case, 1909-Reproduction-
cost-less-depreciation the controlling factor.
32. Oklahoma Supreme Court in Pioneer Telephone Case, 1911-Repro-
duction-cost-less-depreciation the controlling factor.
33. District Judge Evans in Cumberland Telephone Company Case,
1911-Fair value not determined by construction cost.
34. Wisconsin Railroad Commission in Manitowoc Water Case, 1911-
Elements of physical valuation.
35. District Judge Farrington in Spring Valley Water Rate Case, 1911-
Elements of fair value reviewed.
36. Trend of decisions on fair value.
37. No authoritative determination of standard of value.
38. Recent decisions.
39. Valuation standards.
CHAPTER III
MARKET VALUE AS A STANDARD FOR RATE PURPOSES
§ 50. Usual meaning of market value.
51. Application to railroad valuation.
52. Use by Washington Railroad Commission.
53. Statement of theory by Henry Earle Riggs-Investment value.
54. Competition in its relation to market value theory.
55. Favorable location in its relation to market value theory.
56. Monopoly value.
57. Reasonable rates can not be based on market value.
58. The misplaced or partially obsolete plant.
59. Same subject-San Francisco Water Rate Case, 1911.
60. Market value the true standard-Justice Brewer in Reagan v.
Farmers' L. & T. Co., 1894.
61. Market value standard impracticable-California Supreme Court in
San Diego Water Case, 1897.
62. Value as a going business concern-Circuit Judge McCormick in
Metropolitan Trust Co. v. H. & T. C. R. Co., 1898.
63. Value as a producing factor-Circuit Judge Simonton in Mathew v.
Corporation Commissioners, 1901.
64. Market value-District Judge Trieber in Arkansas Rate Cases, 1911.
CHAPTER IV
COST OF REPRODUCTION AS A STANDARD OF VALUE FOR
RATE PURPOSES
§ 70. Arguments advanced.
71. Fluctuations in railroad costs-Minnesota rate decisions.
72. Trend of recent decisions.
73. Identical reproduction of existing plant.
74. Identical reproduction-Wm. H. Bryan on waterworks appraisals.
75. Equally efficient substitute plant.
76. Substitute plant-Maine water plant condemnations, 1902, 1904.
77. Substitute plant-Columbus, Ohio, Electricity Rate Case, 1906.
78. Substitute plant-Spring Valley Water Case, 1908.
79. Substitute plant-Discussion by J. E. Willoughby.
80. Substitute plant-Discussion by C. L. Corey.
81. Cost under present or original conditions.
82. Present or original conditions-Discussion before American Society
of Civil Engineers, 1911.
83. Present or original conditions-St. Louis Public Service Commissior.,
1911.
84. Present or original conditions-Conclusion.
CHAPTER V
ACTUAL COST AS A STANDARD OF VALUE FOR RATE
PURPOSES
95. Actual cost defined.
96. Actual cost a natural standard.
97. Difficulties of determination.
98. Difficulties pointed out in Louisville Telephone Rate Case.
99. Difficulties overestimated.
100. Fluctuations in cost.
101. Extent to which cost changes offset each other.
102. Justice Brewer in Ames v. Union Pacific Railway, 1894.
103. California Supreme Court, 1897.
104. Pennsylvania state courts in Butler Company and Spring Brook
Company Water Cases, 1897, 1899.
105. West Virginia Supreme Court in Coal & Coke Railway Case, 1910.
106. Wisconsin Railroad Commission in Appleton Water Case, 1910.
107. New York Public Service Commission in Kings County Lighting
Case, 1911.
108. Interstate Commerce Commission in Western Rate Advance Case,
§ 109. Connecticut Public Utilities Commission rejects actual cost in favor
of reproduction cost, 1912.
CHAPTER VI
VALUATION OF LAND
1. Treatment of appreciation in land value.
§ 110. Trend of decisions and practice.
111. Consolidated Gas Case-Decision of District Judge Hough.
112. Consolidated Gas Case-United States Supreme Court.
113. Wisconsin Railroad Commission.
114. Committee of National Association of Railway Commissioners,
1910.
115. South Dakota Railroad Commission, 1910.
116. St. Louis Public Service Commission, 1911.
117. Minnesota Railroad Rate Case, 1911.
118. Interstate Commerce Commission-Problem discussed but not de-
cided.
119. Allowance of no return or a reduced rate of return on land.
120. Reduced return allowed on terminals-Minnesota Supreme Court,
1897.
121. Appreciation should be set off against depreciation.
122. Appreciation treated as income.
123. Appreciation treated as income for purposes of United States cor-
poration tax.
124. Income method considered.
125. Actual cost v. present value.
2. Cost of reproduction of railroad right of way.
§ 134. Reproduction cost same as present estimated condemnation cost.
135. Multiples used in various state appraisals.
136. Minnesota Appraisal and Rate Case.
137. South Dakota appraisal, 1910.
138. Justification of use of multiples.
139. New York Appellate Division rejects use of multiples in tax case,
3. Cost of reproduction of terminal land.
§ 140. State railroad appraisals.
141. Minnesota Appraisal and Rate Case.
142. Minnesota Rate Case-Availability for railroad purposes enhances
143. Wisconsin Railroad Commission on availability for special use.
144. Value of adjacent land increased by presence of terminal.
145. Reproduction cost of land as affected by cost of hypothetical build-
4. Methods of appraising land.
§ 146. Sales method defined.
147. Sales method discussed.
148. Sales method rejected in Minnesota Rate Case.
CHAPTER VII
PAVEMENT OVER MAINS
§ 160. Consolidated Gas Case.
161. Consolidated Gas Case-Appeal to Supreme Court of the United
States.
162. Iowa Supreme Court in Cedar Rapids Gas Case, 1909.
163. Wisconsin Railroad Commission-Rate Cases.
164. Wisconsin Railroad Commission-Purchase Cases.
165. Opinions of Hagenah, Corey and Marston.
166. Purchase of water plant at Trenton, Mo.
167. Des Moines Water Rate Case, 1910-1911.
168. New York Public Service Commission in Gas Rate Case, 1911.
169. Summary and conclusion.
CHAPTER VIII
PROPERTY DONATED OR ACQUIRED WITHOUT COST
§ 180. State railroad appraisals.
181. Minnesota Supreme Court on railroad grants, 1897.
182. California Supreme Court on water services, 1897.
183. United States Circuit Judge Morrow excludes fences not built by
company, 1911.
184. Wisconsin Railroad Commission on services provided at consumer's
expense.
185. Opinion of C. L. Corey on services furnished by consumer.
186. State and city aid in grade separation improvements.
187. City's grade separation contribution considered by New York Public
Service Commission.
188. Grade separation contributions in appraisal for capitalization.
189. Conclusion as to grade separation contributions.
190. Statement of problem of donated property.
191. Contributions by the company.
192. The more equitable rule.
CHAPTER IX
PROPERTY CONSTRUCTED OUT OF SURPLUS
$200. Valuation of property constructed out of surplus.
201. Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Brymer v. Water Company, 1897.