Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. v. United States
467 U.S. 1 · Decided May 21, 1984 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. v. United States was decided on May 21, 1984 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, takings clause” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 467 U.S. 1 · 104 S. Ct. 2187 · 81 L. Ed. 2d 1 · 1984 U.S. LEXIS 84
- Docket number
- 82-1994
- Decided
- May 21, 1984
- Argued
- February 22, 1984
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, takings clause
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority |
Full case caption
Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. v. United States
SCDB identifiers: case 1983-097, docket 1983-097-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, takings clause”
- Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff
- Summa Corp. v. California ex Rel. State Lands Commission
- Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.
- United States v. 50 Acres of Land
- United States v. Locke
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City
Cases on the same legal provision: Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Agins et Ux. v. City of Tiburon
- Gurley v. Rhoden
- City of Pittsburgh v. Alco Parking Corp.
- United States v. Fuller et Ux.
- United States v. Grand River Dam Authority
- General Box Co. v. United States
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.
- Calder v. Jones
- Summa Corp. v. California ex Rel. State Lands Commission
- Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 v. Vail
- Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S. A. v. Hall
- Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error