Appendix — United States v. 564.54 Acres of Monroe and Pike County Land
Supreme Court brief1979
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Supreme Court, U.&% “) 7
FILED
APPENDIX JAN 25 1979
MICHAEL RODAK, JR., CLERK
Iu the Supreme Court of the Huited States
OCTOBER TERM, 1978
No. 78-488
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Petitioner
—
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATED IN
MONROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA SYNOD OF THE LUTH-
ERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI! TO THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FILED SEPTEMBER 21, 1978
CERTIORARI GRANTED NOVEMBER 27, 1978
4
i A ett a
“he,
> *o, ae ee Se See LO
<<
~~
Re
reer en erate
Iu the Supreme Court of the United States
OCTOBER TERM, 1978
No. 78-488
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Petitioner
—
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATED IN
MONROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA SYNOD OF THE LUTH-
ERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
TR I Is ss sn ks sen decccdicececsitnipteis Chae
Declaration of Taking and Complaint in Condemnation, filed
STII since Medicated netitiies Lalit 2 kainakanncceas daclteninastonpidcndsbdgnans
Affidavit of Reverend Dr. William A. Janson, filed January
RRR So RE en RRS er Cae OR EAE ene ca PO A
Memorandum and Order of the District Court, filed January
By Fe Oe Te MMI vos cicednrsiccctiecec cba Sc ciscsieescaleceees
' Affidavit of John Levkulic, filed April 24, 1974 0.0...
Affidavit of Reverend Ray Gulliford, filed April 24, 1974 ........
Judgments on Verdict, entered November 5, 1975 ...................
Portions Of the Trial TYAMSCFIDE ....................ci..scecocccececocescecssecee
Supreme Court’s Order of November 27, 1978 granting the
petition for a writ of certiorari .................0.....ccceccseeeeeeeeeeeteees
1
RELEVANT DOCKET ENTRIES
DATE
1970
June 15—COMPLAINT—in condemnation and demand for
trial by jury.
June 15—DECLARATION OF TAKING—
June 15—NOTICE—of condemnation
June 15—PETITION—for order for delivery of possession.
June 15—ORDER—for delivery of possession. (N)
June 6—CERTIFICATE—of Clerk, acknowledging receipt of
check +#104,87 in the sum of $893,000.00 for deposit
in the Registry of the Court, representing estimated
compensation.
1972
Dec. 15—PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM—in support of
pre-trial rulings.
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST—for pre-trial rulings
Dec. 15—PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM—re substitute fa-
cilities as measure of damage Trs. 1500, 2122 & 2123
19738
Jan. 31—AFFIDAVITS—NO TRACT SPECIFIED WERE
SEVERAL MENTIONED—of Rev. Dr. William A.
Janson.
June 22—ORDER—Tr. 1500, 2122, 2132—Plaintiff having
filed a request for pre-trial rulings, and the Court having
heard oral argument and having considered the briefs of
counsel,
It is ORDERED that Tuesday, August 14, 1973 at 2:00 P.M.
at Harrisburg, Pa. is fixed as the time and place for
oral argument and the submission of evidence on the
following issues:
DATE
1973
1. The loss of protection of a grandfather’s clause and the
impact on substituted facilities of regulatory require-
ments of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and any
agency of political subdivision thereof.
2. The public features of the defendants facilities as argued
in defendant’s memorandum. (S)
Copies to counsel of record.
Jan. 15—MEMO & ORDER—(Tr. 1500, 2122, 2132)—It is
Ordered that;
1. The cost of substitute facilities is not a proper measure of
compensation for the taking of defendant’s property.
2. All other rulings relative to the valuation standard or
standards to be applied are reserved. (S)
Copies to Atty Peter M. Mattoon, and U.S. Atty and Atts
Charles MacMullan and Peter H. Ruvolo and Joseph C.
Kreder, Esq.
1974
March 11—ORDER—(Tr. 1500, 2122, 2132)—Defendant,
Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod, having submitted a
letter dated January 22, 1974, requesting that the court’s
order of January 15, 1974, “be amended to include a
Section 1292(b) certification. 28 U.S.C. 1292(b),” and it
appearing that the propriety of the substitution standard
of valuation involves a controlling question of law as to
which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion
and that an immediate appeal from the order may ma-
terially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.
It is ORDERED that
1. The letter of January 22, 1974, from defendant, South-
eastern Pennsylvania Synod, is considered as 2 motion to
amend the court’s order of January 15, 1974, to include
a Section 1292(b) certification, 28 U.S.C. & 1292(b);
DATE
1974
2. The motion is granted.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that the court’s order of Jan-
uary 15, 1974, in the above captioned matter is hereby
amended by adding thereto the following paragraph:
“3. Itis hereby CERTIFIED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. & 1292 (b)
that the propriety of the substitution standard of valua-
tion involves a controlling question of law as to which
there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and
that an immediate appeal from the order may materially
advance the ultimate termination on the litigation.” (S)
Copies to counsel of record.
Apr 24—AFFIDAVIT—of John J. Levkulic. (Originally filed
with the Court on Aug. 14, 1973)
AFFIDAVIT—of Rev. Roy E. Gulliford. (Originally filed with
the Court on Aug. 14, 1973)
APPELLANT’S—tTrs. 1500, 2122, 2132—Southeastern Penn-
sylvania Synod of the Lutheran Church in America, desig-
nation of the Record for Appeal.
1975
Jan. 13—COURT OF APPEALS OPINION—(Filed 12-30-
74) Reversing the judgment of the District Court en-
tered on 1-15-73.
June 12—~AMENDED JUDGMENT— (Certified Copy) (Trs.
1500, 2122 & 2132)—from U.S. Court of Appeals that
the order of the District Court filed January 15, 1974, as
amended by order dated March 11, 1974, be, and the
same is hereby reversed. Each party shall bear his own
costs, and
June 12—ORDER—(Certified copy)—from U.S. Court of
Appeals. The appellee’s Petition for Modification of De-
cember 30, 1974 Opinion or for Rehearing before the
original panel is denied.
DATE
1975
The Judgment of the court is hereby modified to provide that
each party will bear his own costs. (Gibbons)
Copy of Opinion attached thereto.
June 12—Copy of Amended Judgment and Order mailed to
Judge Sheridan.
Documents Nos. 1, 2, 5, 17, 19, 21, 82, 85, 90, 92, 108, 120,
122, 125, 126 and 127 Pertaining to Tracts 1500, 2122
and 2182 mailed to W-B.
Sept. 30—SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES— (Tr. 1500, 2122,
21382)—Jury found that Doctrine of Substitute Facilities
does not apply.
Sept. 30—MINUTE SHEET (9th day)—(Tr. 1500, 2122,
2132)—Synod moves for withdrawal of jury and/or mis-
trial. DENIED. Jury Verdict received (Special Interrog)
and Jury polled. (S)
Oct. 3—VERDICT—Tr. 1500, 2122, 21832—We, the jury, find
in favor of Southeastern Pa. Synod of Lutheran Camps
of America and award the following:
Tr. 1500—Camp Miller—$250,000.00
Tr. 2122—Camp Ministerium—$300,000.00
Tr. 2182—Camp Hagan—$190,000.00
Nov. 5—JUDGMENT ON VERDICT—(Tract 1500)—Or-
dered that judgment be entered in favor of Southeastern
Pa. Synod of Lutheran Camps of America and against
U.S.A. in sum of $250,000.00. The sum of $186,000.00
having been deposited, there remains to be deposited the
sum of $64,000.00 with int. thereon at rate of 6% per
annum from 6/15/70 until date of deposit. (S)
Copies to counsel of record, from Hbg.
DATE
1975
Nov. 5—JUDGMENT ON VERDICT—(Tract 2122)—Or-
dered that judgment be entered in favor of Southeastern
Pa. Synod of Lutheran Camps of America, and against
the U.S.A. in sum of $300,000.00. The sum of $210,000.00
having been deposited into Registry of Court the sum of
$90,000.00 together with int. thereon at rate of 6% per
annum from 6/15/70 until date of deposit. (S)
Copies to counsel from Harris.
Nov. 5—JUDGMENT ON VERDICT—(Tract 2132)—Or-
dered that judgment be entered in favor of Southeastern
Pa. Synod of Lutheran Camps of America and against
the U.S.A. in sum of $190,000.00. The sum of $144,000.00
having been deposited into Registry of Court, the remains
to be deposited into registry the sum of $46,000.00 to-
gether with int. thereon at rate of 6% per annum from
6/15/70 until date of deposit. (S)
Copies to counsel from Harris.
Nov. 14—MOTION—of Condemnee, Southeastern Penna.
Synod of the Lutheran Church In America, for New
Trial, and
Nov. 14—CERTIFICATE—of service thereof.
1976
Dec. 8—OPINION—of Judge Muir, and
Dec. 8—ORDER—(Tracts 1500, 2122 and 2132)—Church in
America’s motion for a new trial is denied. (M)
- Copies to all counsel of record.
1977
Jan. 11—APPEAL—Tr. 1500, 2122, and 2132 (filing fee paid)
—of Defendant Southeastern Pa. Synod of Lutheran
Camp of America from Order of 8th day of Dec., 1976,
denying deft’s. motion for a new trial, and Bond for
Costs in sum of $250.00.
DATE
1977
Jan. 19—RECORD ON APPEAL—mailed to the U.S. Court
of Appeals.
1978
Apr. 25—OPINION—of U.S. Court of Appeals dated 3/27/78
.... “The order of the district court denying the Synod’s
motion for a new trial will be reversed and the case re-
manded for a new trial in accordance with this opinion.
(Judge Van Dusen) ... .” However, because I am bound
by the holding in 564.54 acres I, and because under the
holding of that case as elucidated by Judge Van Dusen,
I do not believe the litigants got a fair trial, I join Judge
Van Dusen in Parts I, II and III of his opinion and |
vote to reverse.” (Concurrence by Judge Stern)
and,
“I respectfully dissent to the remand of this case for
another trial because I believe first that the jury charge
given by the presiding judge, the late Chief Judge Sheri-
dan, faithfully adhered to the principles of law enunciated
by us in U.S. vs. 564.54 Acres of Land I, 506 F.2d 796
(8d Cir. 1974) concerning condemnation of public fa-
cilities owned by a nonprofit property owner, and that
no party objected to the instructions; second, that the
errors, if any, in the charge were minimal_and nowhere
near the magnitude of fundamental error; and third, that
any possible misstatement of the law by the Government
in its closing remarks was specifically cured by the trial
judge”, and I would therefore affirm the judgment of
the district court denying the motion for a new trial.
(Dissent by Judge Rosenn)
June 5—J.S. 5—case reopened
June 6—CASE FILE—returned from US Ct of Appeals.
Judgment 4-25-78
DATE
1978
June 6—DOCKETING LETTER—and
CERT. COPY OF JUDGMENT—from Ct of Appeals (No.
77-1238 C.A.), Ordered and Adjudged that the Order of
the Dist. Ct., dated 12/8/76, be and the same is hereby
reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial in
accordance with the opinion of this Court. Costs taxed
against appellee. (Rosenn and Van Dusen, and Stern)
Certified as a true copy and issued in lieu of a formal
mandate on June 1, 1978. (Total costs taxed $539.15)
(Costs taxed in favor of appellant) Wm 6-5-78
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
Certified from the record
Date—6/16/70
T. H. CAMPION
Clerk
Per—/s/ [Illegible]
Deputy Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v8.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
DECLARATION OF TAKING
TO THE HONORABLE,
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:
I, Stanley R. Resor, Secretary of the Army of the
United States of America, do hereby declare that:
1. (a) The land hereinafter described is taken under
and in accordance with the Act of Congress approved
February 26, 1931 (46 Stat. 1421, 40 U.S.C. 258a),
and acts supplementary thereto and amendatory thereof,
and under the further authority of the Acts of Congress
approved April 24, 1888 (25 Stat. 94, 38 U.S.C. 591),
March 1, 1917 (39 Stat. 948, 33 U.S.C. 701), July 18,
1918 (40 Stat. 911, 33 U.S.C. 594), and August 18,
1941 (55 Stat. 650, 33 U.S.C. 701c-2), which authorize
the acquisition of land for flood control projects; the Act
of Congress approved October 23, 1962 (Public Law 87-
9
874), which act authorizes the development of the Dela-
ware River Basin; the Act of Congress approved Septem-
ber 1, 1965 (Public Law 89-158), which act authorized
the establishment of the Delaware Water Gap National
Recreation Area, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, as part
of the Tocks Island Reservoir Project; and the Acts of
Congress approved October 29, 1969 (Public Law 91-
98) and December 11, 1969 (Public Law 91-144) which
acts made funds available for such purposes.
(b) The public uses for which said land is taken are
as follows: The said land is necessary adequately to pro-
vide for a national recreation area in the Delaware River
Basin and for other uses incident thereto. The said land
has been selected by me for acquisition by the United
States for use in connection with the establishment and
use of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation
Area, as part of the Tocks Island Reservoir Project,
Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and for such other uses
as may be authorized by Congress or by Executive Order.
2. A general description of the land being taken is
set forth in Schedule “A” attached hereto and made a
part hereof, and is a description of the same land de-
scribed in the complaint in the above entitled cause.
3. The estate taken for said public uses is the fee
simple title to the land described in Schedule “A”, subject,
however, to existing easements for public roads and high-
ways, public utilities, railroads and pipelines.
4, Plans showing the land taken are annexed hereto
as Schedule “B” and made a part hereof.
5. The sum estimated by me as just compensation for
said land, with all buildings and improvements thereon
and all appurtenances thereto and including any and all
interests hereby taken in said land, is set forth in Sched-
-ule “A” herein, which sum I cause to be deposited here-
with in the registry of the said court for the use and
benefit of the persons entitled thereto. I am of the
opinion that the ultimate award for said land prcebably
will be within any limits prescribed by law on the price
to be paid therefor.
10
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the United States of
America, by its Secretary of the Army, thereunto au-
thorized, has caused this declaration to be signed in its
name by said Stanley R. Resor, Secretary of the Army,
this 21st day of May A.D. 1970, in the City of Wash-
ington, District of Columbia.
/s/ Stanley R. Resor
Secretary of the Army
11
SCHEDULE A
The land which is the subject matter of this declara-
tion of taking aggregates 564.54 acres in Monroe and
Pike Counties, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. A de-
scription of the land taken, together with the names and
addresses of the purported owners thereof and a ¢‘ate-
ment of the sum estimated to be just compensation there-
for, are as follows:
TRACT NO. 904
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Smithfield, and
more particularly bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of the
subject owner and the lands now or formerly of Frank
LeBar, et al, being a point in the southerly right of
way line of Mohawk Street, as shown on Map of Hi-
a-le-ah Park, Smithfield Township, Monroe County, Penn-
sylvania, dated 1944, and filed for record in Plat book
8, Page 160 in the records of Monroe County, Pennsyl-
vania, the said point being further located South 85°
55’ East 1378 feet, more or less, from the intersection
of the centerline of Pennsylvania Legislative Route Num-
ber 45012 with the centerline of Cedar Street; thence,
from the said point of beginning, and with the lands
of the said LeBar, et al, and with the said southerly
right of way line of Mohawk Street,
(1) North 85° 23’ East 102 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said subject owner and the lands now
or formerly of American Land, Inc.; thence, leaving the
lands of the said LeBar, et al, and leaving the southerly
right of way line of the said Street, and with the lands
of the said American Land, Inc.,
(2) South 28° 34’ East 241 feet, more or iess, to a
point at the mean low water mark of the Delaware River;
thence, leaving the lands of the said American Land, Inc.,
and with the mean low water mark of the said River,
downstream,
12
(3) In a generally southwesterly direction, approxi-
mately 97 feet to a corner common to the lands of the
said subject owner and the lands of the said LeBar,
et al; thence, leaving the mean low water mark of the
said River, and with the lands of the said LeBar, et. al,
(4) North 23° 34’ West 261 feet, more or less, to
the place of beginning, containing 0.56 acre, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone),
1927 N.A. Datum.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in a deed from Detleff
A. Hansen and Lorene A. Hansen, his wife, to Benedict
F. Pastorini and Viola E. Pastorini, his wife, dated
May 29, 1958 and filed for record June 2, 1958 in Deed
Book 243, Page 111 in the records of Monroe County,
Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Benedict F. Pastorini and
Viola E. Pastorini, his wife
210 Sixth Avenue
New York, New York
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $28,000.00
TRACT NO. 908
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Smithfield, and
more particularly bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of the
subject owner and the lands now or formerly of Walter
S. Wyckoff, et ux, and at a point in the line of the
lands now or formerly of Frank LeBar, et al, being a point
in the southerly right of way line of Mohawk Street,
as shown on Map of Hi-a-le-ah Park, Smithfield Town-
ship, Monroe County, Pennsylvania, dated 1944, and
filed for record in Plat Book 8 Page 160 in the records
of Monroe County, Pennsylvania, the said point being
13
further located South 83° 40’ East 882 feet, more or
less, from the intersection of the centerline of Pennsyl-
vania Legislative Route Number 45012 with the center-
line of Cedar Street; thence, from the said point of be-
ginning, and with the lands of the said LeBar, et al, and
with the southerly right of way line of the said Mohawk
Street,
(1) North 76° 36’ East 108 feet to a corner common to
the lands of the said subject owner and the lands now
or formerly of Warren M. Wenner, et ux; thence, leav-
ing the lands of the said LeBar, et al, and leaving the
southerly right of way line of the said Street, and with
the lands of the said Wenner, et ux, the following
courses and distances:
(2) South 19° 39’ East 119 feet,
(8) South 28° 34’ East 204 feet, more or less, to a
point at the mean low water mark of the Delaware
River; thence, leaving the lands of the said Wenner, et
ux, and with the mean low water mark of the said River,
downstream,
(4) In a generally southwesterly direction, approxi-
mately 103 feet to a corner common to the lands of the
said subject owner and the lands of the said Wyckoff,
et ux; thence, leaving the mean low water mark of the
said River, and with the lands of the said Wyckoff, et
ux,
(5) North 23° 34’ West 310 feet, more or less, to the
place of beginning, containing 0.73 acre, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone),
1927 N.A. Datum.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in:
(1) A deed from Warren M. Wenner and Dorothea
M. Wenner, his wife, to Bonnie M. Bourne, dated April
3, 1952, and filed for record April 8, 1952, in Deed Book
184 Page 262.
(2) A deed from George Rowland Collins and Gladys
Collins, his wife, to Bonnie M. Bourne, dated August 30,
1963, and filed for record September 24, 1963, in Deed
Book 312 Page 519.
14
Both the above deeds are found in the records of Mon-
roe County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESS OF
PURPORTED OWNER
Bonnie M. Bourne
186 West 52nd Street
New York. New York
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $42,000.00
TRACT NO, 1120
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Smithfield and
more particularly bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of Salva-
tore Frank Pappalardo, et ux, the lands of Alfred Pap-
palardo Sr., et ux, and the lands of John S. Michael,
said point being the beginning of the eleventh or South
16° 59’ East 578 feet, line of lands described in a deed
from Alfred Pappalardo, Sr. and Mary Pappalardo, his
wife to Salvatore Frank Pappalardo and Mary Edna
Papparaldo, his wife, dated June 11, 1951 and filed for
record in Deed Book 180, Page 165 in the records of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania, said point being further
located South 22° 20’ East 1630 feet, more or less, from
the intersection of the centerline of Township Route Num-
ber 515 with the centerline of Township Route Number
538; thence, from said point of beginning and with the
lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo, Sr.
(1) South 28° 08’ East, passing a corner common to
the lands of said Pappalardo, Sr., and the lands of Frank
B. Kober, et ux, at approximately 483 feet, in all 574
feet to a corner common to the lands of the said Salva-
tore Frank Pappalardo and the lands of Ludwig Hof-
stetter, et al; thence, leaving the lands of the said Kober,
and with the lands of the said Ludwig Hofstetter
(2) South 62° 43’ West 230 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Salvatore Frank Pappalardo, the
5
lands of the said Ludwig Hofstetter and the lands of
Anton Hofstetter; thence, leaving the lands of the said
Ludwig Hofstetter and with the lands of the said Anton
Hofstetter
(3) South 65° 43’ West, passing a corner common to
the lands of the said Anton Hofstetter and the lands of
Josie Pappalardo at approximately (illegible) 56 feet in
all 236 feet to a corner common to the lands of the said
Salvatore Frank Pappalardo and the lands of the said
Jossie Pappalardo; thence, with the lands of the said
Josie Pappalardo
(4) South 26° 45’ East, passing the Northerly right
of way line of Pennsylvania Legislative Route Number
45012 at approximately 263.50 feet in all 279 feet to the
center of the said Legislative Route Number 45012 and
to a corner common to the lands of the said Salvatore
Frank Pappalardo, the lands of the said Josie Pap-
palardo, and the lands of Albert E. Jochen; thence,
leaving the lands of the said Josie Pappalardo and with
the lands of the said Jochen and with the center of the
said Legislative Route Number 45012
(5) South 76° 18’ West 46 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Salvatore Frank Pappalardo,
the lands of the said Jochen, and other lands of Alfred
Pappalardo Sr.; thence, leaving the lands of the said
Jochen and with the lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo,
Sr. and continuing with the center of the said Legislative
Route Number 45012
(6) South 70° 14’ West 219 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Salvatore Frank Pappalardo, the
lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo and the lands of
Frank Pappalardo; thence, leaving the lands of the said
Alfred Pappalardo and with the lands of the said Frank
Pappalardo and continuing with the center of the said
Legislative Route Number 45012
(7) South 78° 48’ West 244 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Salvatore Frank Pappalardo,
the lands of the said Frank Pappalardo and still other
lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo Sr.; thence, leaving
the lands of the said Frank Pappalardo and continuing
with the center of the said Legislative Route Number
16
iti and with the lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo
r.
(8) South 81° 02’ West 178 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Salvatore Frank Pappalardo
and the lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo Sr.,; thence,
leaving the center of the said Legislative Route Number
45012 and with the lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo
Sr., the following courses and distances:
(9) North 27° 20’ West, passing the Northerly right
of way line of the said Legislative Route Number 45012
at approximately 19 feet, in all 601 feet
(10) North 61° 37’ East, passing a corner common to
the lands of the said Alfred Pappalardo Sr. and the
lands of the Scranton Pocono Girl Scout Council at ap-
proximately 395 feet in all 814 feet, to a corner common
to the lands of the said Salvatore Frank Pappalardo, the
lands of the said Girl Scout Council and the lands of the
said Michael; thence, leaving the lands of the said Girl
Scout Council and with the lands of the said Michael
(11) North 47° 46’ East 322 feet to the place of be-
ginning, containing 16.02 acres, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone)
1927 N A Datum.
The above described land is substantially the same land
as that described in a deed from Alfred Pappalardo Sr.
and Mary Pappalardo, his wife, to Salvatore Frank Pap-
palardo and Mary Edna Pappalardo, his wife, dated June
11, 1951 and filed for record June 11, 1951 in Deed Book
180, Page 165 in the records of Monroe County, Penn-
sylvania.
17
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
OF PURPORTED OWNERS:
Salvatore Frank Pappalardo and Earl F. Robacher and
Mary Edna Pappalardo, his wife Mrs. Earl F. Robacher,
R.D. #1 his wife
East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania (first name unknown)
Equitable Life Assurance Society Peheatn teh naa
of the United States
New York, New York Unknown heirs and as-
Mortgagee signs of Earl F. Ro-
George A. Michael bacher and Mrs. Earl
F. Robacher, his wife
(first name unknown)
Private right of way
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $23,500.00
TRACT NO. 1330
Address unknown
Water Rights
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Smithfield and
more particularly bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of Herbert
Erickson, et ux, and the lands of John C. Kinsella, et al,
and at a point on the easterly side of an unnamed
street, said point being the beginning of the fourth or
North 70° 08’ East 174.31 feet, line of lands described
in a deed from Frank J. Young and Norma E. Young,
his wife, to Herbert Erickson and Helen Mary Erickson,
his wife, dated August 10, 1957 and filed for record in
Deed Book 285, Page 686, in the records of Monroe
.County, Pennsylvania; thence, from said point of be-
ginning, and with the lands of the said Kinsella
(1) North 58° 36’ East 175.5 feet to a point in the
line of lands of Pardee’s Beach Development Corpora-
tion; thence, leaving the lands of the said Kinsella, and
with the lands of the said Corporation
(2) South 27° 45’ East 99 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Erickson, and the lands of New-
18
ton R. Brown, Jr., et ux; thence, leaving the lands of
the said Corporation and with the lands of the said
Brown
(3) South 58° 36’ West 186 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Erickson, lands of the said Brown,
and to a point on the easterly side of the said unnamed
street; thence, leaving the lands of the said Brown and
the easterly side of the said unnamed street
(4) North 31° 15’ West 99 feet to the place of be-
ginning, containing 0.39 acre, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone)
1927 N A Datum.
The above described land is substantially the same land
as that described in a deed from Frank J. Young and
Norma E. Young, his wife, to Herbert Erickson and
Helen Mary Erickson, his wife, dated August 10, 1957
and filed for record August 12, 1957 in Deed Book 235,
Page 686 in the records of Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Herbert Erickson and Mary A. Treible, her
Helen Mary Erickson, his wife heirs, devisees and as-
571 46th Street signs
Brooklyn, New York Address unknown
Right of Way
East Stroudsburg Savings,
Building and Loan Association
East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania
Mortgagee
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $12,000.00
TRACT 1500
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, Couity of Monroe, Township of Smithfield and
Township of Middle Smithfield and more particularly
bounded and described as follows:
19
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of the
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium, and the lands of John
S. Michael, and at a point in the line of lands of Pardee’s
Beach Development Corporation, said point being the
beginning of the third, or South 2412° East 59 perches,
line of lands described in a deed from E. Clarence Miller
and Cornelia E. Miller, his wife, to the Evangelical
Lutheran Ministerium, dated July 17, 1928 and filed for
record in Deed Book 111, Page 507 in the records of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania, said point being further
located South 42° 30’ West 4420 feet, more or less, from
the intersection of the centerline of Township Route Num-
ber 546 with the centerline of Township Route Number
515; thence, from said point of beginning and with the
lands of the said Michael, the following courses and
distances:
(1) North 59° 37 East 141 feet
(2) North 37° 00’ East 1370 feet to a point in the
line of lands of Herbert H. Theune; thence, leaving the
lands of the said Michael, and with the lands of the said
Theune
(3) South 28° 40’ East, passing the center of Pennsyl-
vania Legislative Route Number 45012 at approximately
1390 feet, in all 2829 feet to a point on the right bank
of the Delaware River; thence, leaving the lands of the
said Theune, and with the right bank of the said river,
downstream, the following courses and distances:
(4) South 66° 59’ West, passing the line between the
Township of Smithfield and the Township of Middle
Smithfield at approximately 350 feet, in all 1054 feet
(5) South 56° 48’ West 484 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Ministerium and the lands of
. Patrick F. Rooney, et al; thence, leaving the right bank
of the said river and with the lands of the said Rooney
(6) North 28° 33’ West, passing a corner common
to the lands of the said Rooney and the lands of Ervin
E. Rouch, et ux, and repassing the center of the said
Legislative Route at approximately 997 feet, in all 1237
feet, to a corner common to the lands of the said Minis-
terium and the lands of the said Corporation; thence,
20
leaving the lands of the said Rouch, and with the lands
of the said Corporation, the following courses and dis-
tances:
(7) North 52° 41’ East, repassing the line between
the Township of Smithfield and the Township of Middle
Smithfield at approximately 46 feet, in all 138 feet
(8) North 28° 30’ West 937 feet, to the place of
beginning, containing 82.39 acres, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone)
1927 N A Datum.
The above described land is substantially the same land
as that described in a deed from E. Clarence Miller
and Cornelia E. Miller, his wife, to the Evangelical Lu-
theran Ministerium dated July 17, 1928 and filed for
record August 7, 1930 in Deed Book 111, Page 507 in
the records of Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Evangelical Luthern Ministerium
Also known as Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of
Pennsylvania and Adjacent States
A Pennsylvania Corporation
c/o Peter M. Mattoon, Esgq.,
1035 Land Title Building
Broad and Chestnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Estimated Just Compensation $186,000.00
TRACT 1501
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field and more particularly bounded and described as
follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of Herbert
H. Theune, and the lands of Lee B. Koehler, et ux, and
21
at a point in the line of lands of Deer Haven Corpora-
tion, said point being the beginning of the fifth or South
33° 25’ East 1505 feet, line of lands described on page
20 in a survey dated January 9, 1942 in a deed from
Karl Theune and Elizabeth Theune, his wife, to Herbert
H. Theune, dated July 29, 1953 and filed for record in
Deed Book 195, Page 19, in the records of Monroe
County, Pennsylvania, said point being further located
North 69° C0’ West 2890 feet, more or less, from the
intersection of the centerline of Township Route Number
546, with the centerline of Pennsylvania Legislative
Route Number 45012; thence, from said point of be-
ginning, and with the lands of the said Koehler
(1) South 45° 09’ East, passing a corner common to
the lands of the said Koehler and the lands of Louis
Warncke, et ux, and passing the center of Township
Route Number 515 at approximately 718 feet, in all 1503
feet, to a corner common to the lands of the said Theune
and the lands of the said Warncke; thence, continuing
with the lands of the said Warncke
(2) North 50° 28’ East 891 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Theune, lands of the said
Warncke, and the lands of Edith M. Michael; thence,
leaving the lands of the said Warncke, and with the
lands of the said Edith M. Michael, as fol!-ws:
(3) North 40° 49’ East 29 feet
(4) South 45° 34’ East, passing the Northerly right
of way line of the said Legislative Route at approxi-
mately 994.50 feet, in all 1011 feet to the center of the
said Legislative Route and leaving the center of the said
Legislative Route
(5) South 38° 03’ East, passing the Southerly right
of way line of the said Legislative Route at approxi-
‘mately 16.50 feet, in all 117 feet
(6) South 53° 08’ West 35 feet
(7) South 34° 12’ East $13 feet to a point on the right
bank of the Delaware River; thence, leaving the lands
of the said Edith M. Michael, and with the right bank
of the said river, downstream, the following courses and
distances:
22
(8) South 48° 36’ West 327 feet
(9) South 39° 10’ West 404 feet
(10) South 37° 54’ West 583 feet
(11) South 45° 14’ West 538 feet
(12) South 51° 34’ West 532 feet
(13) South 59° 29’ West 311 feet to a corner common to
to the lands of the said Thenue and the lands of the
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium; thence, leaving the
right bank of the said river, and with the lands of the
said Ministerium
(14) North 28° 40’ West, passing the center of the
said Legislative Route at approximately 1,439 feet, pass-
ing a corner common to the lands of the said Minister-
ium, and the lands of John S. Michael, at approximately
2,829 feet, and passing the Southerly right of way line
of the said Township Route Number 515 at approxi-
mately 3,132.50 feet, in all 3,149 feet, to a corner com-
mon to the lands of the said Thenue and the lands of the
said John S. Michael, and to a point in the center of the
said Township Route Number 515; thence, with the cen-
ter of the said Township Route Number 515, and con-
tinuing with the lands of the said John S. Michael
(15) South 76° 58’ West 661 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Theune, lands of the said John
S. Michael, and the lands of the said Corporation; thence,
leaving the center of the said Township Route Number
515, and leaving the lands of the said John S. Michael,
and with the lands of the said Corporation, the follow-
ing courses and distances:
(16) North 44° 44’ West, passing the Northerly right
of way line of the said Township Route Number 515 at
approximately 16.50 feet, in all 760 feet
(17) North 43° 26’ East 647 feet
(18) South 43° 34’ East 540 feet
(19) North 48° 03’ East 1005 feet to the place of be-
ginning, containing 178.39 acres, more or less.
There is excepted from the above described land, the
following tract:
Tract: 1515
Owner: Nicholas J. Behr, et ux —
Acres: 1.02
23
The above described land after the aforesaid excep-
tion contains 177.37 acres, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone)
1927 N A Datum.
The above described land is substantially the same
land as that described in a deed from Karl Theune and
Elizabeth Theune, his wife, to Herbert H. Theune, dated
July 29, 1953 and filed for record August 7, 1953, in
Deed Book 195, Page 19, in the records of Monroe
County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Herbert H. Theune and Mrs. Samuel Strunk
Maria Theune, his wife Address unknown
R.D. #1 Right of Way
East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania Wilson Stettler
Karl Theune and R.D. #2
Elizabeth Thenue, his wife Northampton,
Address unknown Pennsylvania
Life Estate Tenant
Equitable Life Assurance Society
of the United States
New York, New York
Mortgagee
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $175,000.00
TRACT 2122
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field and more particularly bounded and described as
follows:
Beginning at a corner common io the lands of the
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsylvania and
Adjacent States and the lands of the Monroe Security
———
24
Bank and Trust Company, Trustee, and in the line of
the lands of Karl Hope, et ux, said point being located
South 24° 50’ West 3635 feet, more or less, from the
intersection of the center of Legislative Route Number
45012 with the center of Township Route Number 633;
thence, from the said point of beginning and with the
lands of the said Bank and Trust Company, the follow-
ing courses and distances:
(1) South 46° 46’ East 1664 feet (3rd Course, Deed
Book 151, Page 188, North 43° West, 100 perches) to a
point in the center of the said Legislative Route; thence,
continuing with the lands of the said Bank and Trust
Company and with the center of the said Legislative
Route,
(2) South 33° 01’ West 376 feet to a point in the
center of the said Legislative Route; thence, leaving the
center of the said Legislative Route and continuing with
the lands of the said Bank and Trust Company,
(3) South 57° 36’ East 1079 feet to a point in the
right descending bank of the Delaware River; thence,
leaving the lands of the said Bank and Trust Company,
and with the said right descending bank of the Dela-
ware River, the following courses and distances:
(4) South 02° 58’ East 394 feet,
(5) South 19° 34’ West 418 feet,
(6) South 31° 21’ West 556 feet,
(7) South 40° 05’ West 386 feet,
(8) South 26° 32’ West 358 feet to a corner common to
the lands of Edward J. McFeely, et ux, and the lands of
the said Ministerium; thence, leaving the right descend-
ing bank of the said river, and with the lands of the
said McFeely, et ux,
(9) North 54° 20’ West 394 feet to a point in the
center of the said legislative route; thence, continuing
with the lands of the said McFeely, et ux, and with the
center of the said legislative route,
(10) South 13° 25’ West 250 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Ministerium and the lands of
Mary Kessler Barr; thence, leaving, the lands of the
25
said McFeely, et ux, and leaving the center of the said
Legislative Route, and with the lands of the said Barr,
(11) North 53° 57’ East 530 feet; thence, continu-
ing with the lands of the said Barr, the following courses
and distances:
(12) South 41° 32’ West 258 feet,
(13) North 52° 05’ West 1055 feet to a point in the
line of the lands of John A. Farrington; thence, leaving
the lands of the said Barr and with the lands of the said
Farrington, the following courses and distances:
(14) North 49° 46’ East 455 feet,
(15) North 47° 13’ West, crossing the center of Town-
ship Route Number 515 at approximately 21 feet, pass-
ing a corner common to the lands of the said Farrington
and lands of Western Heritage Properties Limited (Inc.)
at 105 feet, in all 854 feet,
(16) South 74° 45’ West 262 feet to a corner common
to the lands of Francis Hickok Erdman, et al, and the
lands of the said Western Heritage; thence, leaving the
lands of the said Western Heritage and with the lands
of the said Erdman, et al, the following courses and
distances:
(17) North 46° 31’ West 845 feet,
(18) North 46° 25’ East, passing a corner common
to the lands of the said Erdman, et al, and the lands of
George K. Brands, Sr., et ux, at 498 feet, passing a
corner common to the lands of said Brands, Sr., et ux,
and lands of Karl Hope, et ux, at 1592 feet, in all 2563
feet, to the place of beginning, containing 183.79 acres,
more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone),
1927 N. A. Datum.
It being the intent of the foregoing description to in-
clude a part of the same land as that described in a deed
from Mary Turn Balir, et al, to Evangelical Lutheran
Ministerium of Pennsylvania and Adjacent States, dated
September 12, 1945 and filed for record September 26,
1945 in Deed Book 151, Page 133, in the records of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
26
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium
Also known as Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium
of Pennsylvania and Adjacent States
c/o Peter M. Mattoon, Esq.,
1035 Land Title Building
Broad and Chestnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Estimated Just Compensation $210,000.00
TRACT 2132
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field, and more particularly bounded and described as
follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lands of the
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsylvania and
Adjacent States and the lands of John Stettler, et ux, and
at a point in the line of the lands of Sterling R. Schoon-
over, said point being further located North 80° 26’
East 3410 feet, more or less, from the intersection of the
center of Legislative Route Number 45012 with the center
of Township Route Number 633; thence, from the said
point of beginning and with the lands of the said Stet-
tler, et ux,
(1) South 51° 42’ East, passing a corner common to
the lands of the said Stettler, et ux, and the lands of
Harold Jensen, et ux, at 420 feet, the said point being
in the center of Township Route Number 515, in all 965
feet, to a point on the right descending bank of the
Delaware River; thence, leaving the lands of the said
Jensen, et ux, and with the said right descending bank
the following courses and distances:
= tae 61° 46’ West 69 feet,
outh 35° 02’ West 1396 feet to a corner com
to the lands of the said Ministerium and the lini at
27
Albert A. Owens, et ux; thence, leaving the right de-
scending bank and with the lands of the said Owens,
et ux,
(4) North 49° 50’ West 892 feet to a point in the
center of the said Township Route Number 515; thence,
continuing with the lands of the said Owens, et ux, and
with the center of the said Township Route Number
515,
(5) South 62° 13’ West 140 feet to a point in the
center of the said Township Route Number 515; thence,
leaving the center of the said Township Route Number
515, and eontinuing with the lands of the said Owens,
et ux, the following courses and distances:
(6) North 61° 01’ West 478 feet,
(7) North 48° 42’ East 141 feet,
(8) North 56° 54’ East 198 feet,
(9) South 60° 37’ East 247 feet,
(10) North 40° 20’ East 895 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said Owens, et ux, and the lands of
the said Schoonover; thence, leaving the lands of the said
Owens, et ux, and with the lands of the said Schoonover,
(11) North 44° 15’ East 377 feet (6th Course, Deed
Book 125, Page 475, North 57° 49’ East 364.5 feet) to
the place of beginning, containing 37.72 acres, more or
less.
It being the intent of the foregoing description to in-
clude the same land as that described in:
(1) A deed from J. W. R. Hilliard and Anne H. Hil-
liard, his wife, to Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of
Pennsylvania and Adjacent States, dated November 18,
1936 and filed for record November 30, 1936, in Deed
Book 125, Page 475.
(2) A deed from J. W. R. Hilliard and Anne H. Hil-
liard to Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsyl-
vania and Adjacent States, dated January 18, 1937 and
filed for record February 20, 1937, in Deed Book 126,
Page 184.
(3) A deed from J. W. R. Hilliard and Anne H. Hil-
liard to Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsyl-
vania and Adjacent States, dated November 10, 1944
28
and filed for record February 14, 1945 in Deed Book
148, Page 414.
All of the above deeds are found in the records of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium J. W. R. Hilliard
Also known as Evangelical and Ann H. Hilliard,
Lutheran Ministerium of his wife
Pennsylvania and Adjacent States Address unknown
A Pennsylvania Corporation Option Rights
c/o Peter M. Mattoon, Esq.,
1035 Land Title Building
Broad and Chestnut Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Estimated Just Compensation $144,000.00
TRACT NOS. 2940 AND 2941
TRACT NO. 2940
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field, and more particularly bounded and described as
follows:
Being all of lots numbers two (2), three (3), four (4),
five (5), six (6), seven (7), eight (8) and nine (9), in
Section Number Two (2), Map of Proposed Sub-division,
Winona Lakes, Middle Smithfield Township, Monroe
County, Pennsylvania, dated December, 1964, and filed
for record March 15, 1965 in Plot Book 9, Page 121, in
the records of Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
The above described tract contains 5.63 acres, more or
ess.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in a deed from Karl Hope
and Hilda Hope, his wife, to ‘Florence McMenamin,
29
dated December 5, 1968 and filed for record December
5, 1968, in Deed Book 368, Page 596, in the record of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
TRACT NO. 2941
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field, and more particularly bounded and described as
follows:
Being all of lots numbers eighty-five (85), eighty-six
(86), eighty-seven (87), eighty-eight (88), eighty-nine
(89) and ninety (90) in Section Number Two (2), Map
of Proposed Sub-division, Winona Lakes, Middle Smith-
field Township, Monroe County, Pennsylvania, dated De-
cember, 1964, and filed for record March 15, 1965 in Plot
Book 9, Page 121, in the records of Monroe County,
Pennsylvania.
The above described tract contains 2.40 acres, more
or less.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in a deed from Karl
Hope and Hilda Hope, his wife, to Florence McMenamin,
dated December 5, 1968 and filed for record December
5, 1968, in Deed Book 368, Page 601, in the records of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF PURPORTED OWNER
OF TRACT NOS. 2940 AND 2941
Florence McMenamin
c/o Harold E. Kohn
2600 The Fidelity Building
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION
FOR TRACT NO. 2940 $5,000.00
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION
FOR TRACT NO, 2941 $2,000.00
TRACT NO. 2942
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field, and more particularly bounded and described. as
follows:
Being all of lot number ninety-four (94) in Section
Number Two (2), Map of Proposed Sub-division, Winona
Lakes, Middle Smithfield Township, Monroe County,
Pennsylvania, dated December, 1964, and filed for record
March 15, 1965 in Plot Book 9, Page 121, in the records
of Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
The above described tract contains 0.36 acre, more or
less.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in a deed from Karl
Hope and Hilda Hope, his wife, to Norman Lohman
dated February 14, 1969, and filed for record February
17, 1969, in Deed Book 370, Page 660, in the records
of Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS:
Norman Lohman and
Agnes L. Lohman, his wife
85 North First Street
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $1,750.00
TRACT NO. 2943
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Penn-
sylvania, County of Monroe, Township of Middle Smith-
field, and more particularly bounded and described as
follows:
Being all of lot number ninety-five (95) in Section
Number Two (2), Map of Proposed Sub-division,
Winona Lakes, Middle Smithfield Township, Monroe
County, Pennsylvania, dated December, 1964, and filed
31
for record March 15, 1965 in Plot Book 9, Page 121,
in the records of Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
The above described tract contains 0.88 acre, more or
less.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in a deed from Kar]
Hope and Hilda Hope, his wife, to Robert J. Berish dated
February 14, 1969, and filed for record February 17,
1969, in Deed Book 370, Page 656, in the records of
Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF
PURPORTED OWNERS:
Robert J. Berish and
Carolyn H. Berish, his wife
2 North Seventh Street
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $1,750.00
TRACT NO. 8547
A certain tract of land situated in the State of Pem»-
sylvania, County of Pike, Township of Lehman, and more
particularly bounded and described as follows:
Beginning at a corner common to the lends of the
subject cwner, the lands now or formerly of Lovias, P,
Browning, et al, and at a point in the lands now or
formerly of Irving S. Courtright, et ux, the said point
being located in the center of Township Route Number
818, the said point being further located South 30° 58’
East 660 feet, more or less, from the intersection of the
center of the said Township Route Number 318 with the
center of Township Route Number 3814; thence, from
the said point of beginning and with the lands of the
said Browning, et al, the following courses and distances:
82
(1) South 27° 46’ West 153 feet
(2) North 58° 20’ West, passing a corner common to
the lands of the said Browning, et al, and the lands now
or formerly of Frederick Alfred Kellermann, et ux, and
continuing with the center of the said Township Route
Number 314, at 1022 feet, in all 1302 feet, to a corner
common to the lands of the said subject owner and the
lands of the said Browning, et al, and at a point in the
center of the said Township Route Number 314; thence,
leaving the lands of the said Kellermann, et ux, and
leaving the center of the said Township Route Number
314 and with the lands of the said Browning, et al, the
following courses and distances:
(3) North 56° 16’ East 583 feet
(4) North 40° 29’ East 346 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said subject owner and the lands now
or formerly of the Honeymoon Resorts, Inc., and at a
point in the center of the said Township Route Number
318; thence, leaving the lands of the said Browning,
et al, and with the lands of the said Resorts, Inc., and
with the center of the said Township Route Number
318, the following courses and distances:
(5) South 38° 03’ East 260 feet
(6) South 04° 14’ East 32 feet to a point in the center
of the said Township Route Number 318; thence, leaving
the center of the said Township Route Number 318 and
continuing with the lands of the said Resorts, Inc.,
(7) North 74° 10’ East 807 feet, (1st Course, Deed
Book 84 Page 5538, North 86° 00’ East 50 rods),
(8) South 61° 34’ East 535 feet
(9) North 55° 20’ East 127 feet
(10) North 19° 46’ East 88 feet
(11) South 60° 29’ East 193 feet
(12) North 21° 51’ East 591 feet to a point in the
line of the lands of the said Browning, et al; thence,
leaving the lands of the said Resorts, Inc., and with the
33
lands of the said Browning, et al, the following courses
and distances:
(18) South 36° 54’ East 846 feet
(14) South 48° 28’ West 1415 feet to a corner common
to the lands of the said subject owner, the lands of the
said Courtright, et ux; thence, leaving the lands of the
said Browning, et al, and with the lands of the said
Courtright, et ux, the following courses and distances:
(15) North 63° 04’ West 870 feet
(16) South 41° 52’ West 256 feet to a point in the
center of the said Township Route Number 318; thence,
continuing with the lands of the said Courtright, et ux,
and with the center of the said Township Route Number
318,
(17) South 31° 13’ East 69 feet to the place of be-
ginning, containing 56.80 acres, more or less.
The bearings used herein are referenced to the Penn-
sylvania State Rectangular Grid System (North Zone),
1927 N.A. Datum.
It is the intent of the foregoing description to include
the same land as that described in:
(1) A deed from Mary C. McCaffrey, widow, to
Richard Thoma and Elsie Thoma, his wife, dated March
26, 1931 and filed for record March 27, 1931 in Deed
Book 84, Page 553.
(2) A deed from W. L. DeVore and Rose M. DeVore,
his wife, to Richard Thoma and Elsie Thoma, his wife,
dated August 8, 1939 and filed for record October 19,
1940 in Deed Book 95, Page 520.
Both of the above deeds are found in the records of
Pike County, Pennsylvania.
The said Richard Thoma died during December, 1943.
34
NAME AND ADDRESS OF
PURPORTED OWNERS
Elsie Thoma, widow
413 58rd Street
West New York, New Jersey
ESTIMATED JUST COMPENSATION $62,000.00
The.gross sum estimated to be just compensation for the
land hereby taken is $893,000.00
35
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
[Filed Jan. 31, 1973]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE oR LEsS, SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
AFFIDAVIT OF REV. DR. WILLIAM A. JANSON
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA as
COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA )
I, William A. Janson, being duly sworn according to
law, depose and say as follows:
1. I am the president of the Southeastern Pennsyl-
vania Synod of the Lutheran Church in America (“the
Synod”), a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation which is
the owner of land involved in the above captioned con-
demnation proceedings. This affidavit is based either upon
personal knowledge or information and belief.
2. A portion of the condemned property known as
Camp Miller, and designated as Tract 1500 on the Corps
of Engineers Project Map, is composed of approximately
82 acres of land which were purchased by the Synod in
‘1927. The construction of improvements essential to its
use as a camp was begun immediately thereafter, and on
the date of the condemnation there were approximately
55 structures in use on this Tract. These included,
among others, 22 cabins, kitchen and dining facilities,
staff quarters, an infirmary and administration facilities.
36
These structures were erected and utilized for the sole
purpose of operating a summer camp for approximately
1450 boys each year. A staff of 68 persons operated the
camp.
8. Another portion of the condemned property, known
as Camp Hagan, and designated as Tract 2132 on the
Corps of Engineers Project Map, is composed of ap-
proximately 40 acres of land which were purchased in
1937. The thirty-four structures being used on the con-
demnation date were erected over a period of years be-
ginning in 1937 and ending in 1959. The types of struc-
tures at Camp Hagan are similar to those found at Camp
Miller and they were used exclusively for the purpose
of operating a summer camp for approximately 1400
young girls yearly. A staff of 68 persons operated this
camp.
4. The third portion of the condemned property, known
as Camp Ministerium, and designated as Tract 2122 on
the Corps of Engineers Project Map, consists of approxi-
mately 184 acres of land which were purchased in 1945.
This camp was constructed in the 10 year period from
1947 to 1959 and consisted of approximately 37 struc-
tures on the date of condemnation. These structures,
which are similar to those provided at the other two
camps, were used exclusively for family camping and
accommodated approximately 600 persons a year. A
staff of 32 persons operated the camp.
5. In order to provide a substitute for the camp fa-
cilities condemned by the Government, the Synod has
acquired a large tract of land, at a cost of $321,000, in
Bear Creek Township, Luzerne County. The Synod has
already expended an amount in excess of $110,000 for
engineering and architectural fees incurred in planning
the proposed construction of substitute facilities. The
new facilities will be functionally equivalent to those
condemned by the Government, and these facilities will
meet the state regulatory requirements promulgated since
the erection of the condemned facilities.
6. The City of Philadelphia operates a residential
camp facility on a 671 acre tract of land in Monroe and
Pike Counties, Pennsylvania. This camp, Camp William
87
Penn, is located in the same area, and has facilities
similar to those provided by the Synod’s camps. Camp
William Penn has 75 structures and serves approximately
1450 Philadelphia children yearly.
7. The City of Philadelphia also operates Camp Larch-
wood, a residential camp located in Berks County on 120
acres of land leased by the City. Camp Larchwood serves
approximately 400 Philadelphia children yearly.
8. The federal government as part of the Model Cities
program, P.L. 89-754; 80 Stat. 1255, totally finances
the operation of Camp Larchwood and also provides ap-
proximately $200,000 per annum to cover the cost of
indigent Philadelphia children attending private camps.
/s/ William A. Janson
WILLIAM A. JANSON
SWORN and SUBSCRIBED before me this 22nd day
of January, 1973.
/s/ (Illegible]
Notary Public
Philadelphia, Philadelphia Co.
My Commission Expires March 13, 1976
38
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
No. 70-240 Civil
Tract No. 1500
Tract No. 2122
Tract No. 2132
[Filed Jan. 15, 1974]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
Vv.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff :
For Defendant
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Synod of the Lutheran
Church in America
S. John Cottone
United States Attorney
Post Office Building
Scranton, Pa.
Peter H. Ruvolo
Attorney
William J. Kollins
Attorney
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C.
John V. Bonneau, Esq.
Peter M. Mattoon, Esq.
H. Ober Hess, Esq.
Ballard, Spahr, Andrews &
Ingersoll
1035 Land Title Building
Philadelphia, Pa.
Joseph C. Kreder, Esq.
Warren, Hill, Henkelman &
McMenamin
Scranton Electric Building
Scranton, Pa.
39
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT |
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
No. 70-240 Civil
Tract No. 1500
Tract No. 2122
Tract No. 2132
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v.
564.54: ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, United States of America, has requested the
court to make certain pre-trial rulings in the above cap-
tioned matter.
On June 15, 1970, the government condemned three
recreational camps titled in the name of the Southeastern
Pennsylvania Synod of the Lutheran Church in America.
The camps were used by children during the summer
months of each year. Foiiowing the condemnation two
of the three camps were leased back to the defendant
by the government for an annual rental. The camp pro-
gram is conducted in the name of the Eastern Pennsyl-
vania Lutheran Camp Corporation, a Pennsylvania non-
profit corporation, the board of directors of which is
appointed by the president of the Southeastern Pennsyl-
vania Synod of the Lutheran Church in America and
the Northeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Lutheran
Church in America on a joint basis.
The camps are open to children without any restriction
as to race, creed or color, nor is there any policy of
40
iving priority in registration to any religious denomina-
tion. F eater atlania are accepted on a first come first
serve basis. The camps also serve children with mental,
psychological, financial and other special needs.
The main issue before the court at this time is what
standard is to be applied in determining “just com-
pensation” for the property condemned. Defendant ar-
gues that the substitution of facilities doctrine is to be
applied in this situation where a non-profit corporation
supplies a public service. The government contends that
only when a public governmental body is the condemnee
is substitution a proper standard.
Defendant’s land apparently has a special character.
The land and improvements were specifically designed
for camping purposes. The camps provide a service not
only to those of the Lutheran faith but to children of
all faiths and diverse backgrounds. However, the owner-
ship of the camps is in a private organization.
Only in those cases in which the condemnee was a
governmental public entity has the substitution doctrine
been applied. Brown v. U.S., 1923, 263 U.S. 78; US.
v. Certain Lands, 3 Cir. 1957, 246 F. 2d 823; U.S. v.
Certain Property in Borough of Manhattan, 2 Cir. 1968,
403 F. 2d 800; U.S. v. Certain Property in Borough of
Brooklyn, 2 Cir. 1965, 346 F. 2d 690; U.S. v. New
York, 2 Cir. 1948, 168 F. 2d 387; U.S. v. Board of
Education of Mineral County, 4 Cir. 1958, 253 F. 2d
760; Town of Clarksville, Va. v. U.S., 4 Cir. 1952, 198
F. 2d 238, cert. denied, 1953, 344 U.S. 927; Mayor and
City of Baltimore v. U.S., 4 Cir. 1945, 147 F. 2d 786;
City of Fort Worth v. U.S., 5 Cir. 1951, 188 F. 2d 217;
Jefferson County v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 6 Cir.
1945, 146 F. 2d 564, cert. denied, 1945, 324 U.S. 871;
U.S. v. Arkansas, 8 Cir. 1947, 164 F. 2d 948; US. v.
Des Moines County, 8 Cir. 1945, 148 F. 2d 448, cert.
denied, 1945, 326 U.S. 743; State of Washington v. US.,
9 Cir. 1954, 214 F. 2d 33, cert. denied, 1954, 348 U.S.
41
862; California v. U.S., 9 Cir. 1948, 169 F. 2d 914;
U.S. v. Los Angeles County, 9 Cir. 1947, 163 F. 2d 124;
Woodville v. U.S., 10 Cir. 1946, 152 F. 2d 735, cert.
denied, 1946, 328 U.S. 842; U.S. v. Certain Land in City
of Red Bluff, N.D. Cal. 1961, 192 F. Supp. 725; US.
v. 43.635 Acres of Land, D.C. Mo. 1960, 183 F. Supp.
168; U.S. v. 1.433 Acres of Land, D. Kans. 1947, 71
F. Supp. 854; U.S. v. 0.886 of an Acre of Land, E.D.
N.Y. 1946, 65 F. Supp. 827. See also Just Compensa-
tion And The Public Condemnee, 1966, 75 Yale L.J. 1053;
Level, Evaluation Of Special Purpose Properties In Con-
demnation Proceedings, 1971, 3 Urban Lawyer 428;
40 A.L.R. 3d 143.
The substitution standard is allowed a public con-
demnee because of the unique nature of the ownership,
i.e., community property, and the necessity, legal or other-
wise, to replace the facility, U.S. v. Certain Property in
Borough of Manhattan, supra. A governmental unit
has the responsibility to serve the public, and holds prop-
erty in trust for the public welfare. When public prop-
erty is lost through condemnation, the measure of com-
pensation is the cost of providing the community with
a necessary replacement. U.S. v. Certain Lands, 3 Cir.
1957, supra; U.S. v. Certain Property in Borough of
Manhattan, supra. Unlike the private condemnee situa-
tion, the governmental condemnee, when there is no neces-
sity to replace the facility, is entitled to little or no
compensation since there is no loss suffered. U.S. v. Cer-
tain Lands, supra.
The governmental condemnee does not hold property
for its own advantage, but solely for the public need.
U.S. v. Certain Lands, supra. The loss is peculiar to the
‘community and compensation is measured not in “value”
but by the loss to the community. U.S. v. Certain Prop-
erty in Borough of Manhattan, supra.
The defendant is not 2 governmental public condemnee,
but a private religious organization. The property is not
held and used exclusively for the public without any ad-
42
vantage to the defendant.’ The camp program is con-
ducted in the name of the Eastern Pennsylvania Lutheran
Camp Corporation, The defendant is under no public
obligation to replace the camp facilities. The fact de-
fendant considers it a practical necessity to rebuild the
camp is not unlike any other private condemnee who
must out of a practical necessity rebuild a home, busi-
ness place, or eleemosynary facility. The defendant can
be made whole by using a valuation standard of com-
pensation.
“|. . Confronted with the occasional inadequacy of
the ‘market value’ test and the general imprac-
ticability of any other, the courts have adopted a
pragmatic solution. In certain instances, notably
in the case of property held for eleemosynary or
other nonprofit purposes, such as schools, churches
and clubs (but not private dwellings), and public
utilities, where property with a high value for the
use to which it is being put would have a much
lower market value because of the paucity or ab-
sence of buyers for that use, the courts consider value
to the owner, sometimes finding it necessary to
apologize for what is wrongly conceived to be a
lapse from true doctrine by the rather obviously un-
true statement that the property has ‘no’ market
1 Although the religious distribution of the campers results from
a first come first serve application policy, the following distribution
of Lutheran and non-Lutheran campers from two camps, Miller
and Hagan, is relevant:
Lutheran Non-Lutheran
1965 59% 41%
1966 60% 49% [sic]
1967 62% 88%
1968 64% 84% [sic]
1969 61% 89%
1970 43% 57%
1971 41% 59%
1972 45% 55%
Affidavit of Rev. Roy E. Gulliford at 7.
43
value, 1 Orgel, supra, § 38; in such cases evidence
of reproduction cost less depreciation is admitted,
whether as showing value to the owner or as in-
dicating what might be paid by a buyer if one ex-
isted.” United States v. Certain Property Located
in the Borough of Manhattan, 2 Cir. 1962, 306 F.
2d 489, 447.
The defendant can at any time cease to use the land as
a camping facility, and can use it for any purpose it
deems proper. A governmental body does not have such
discretion without violating the public trust.
It is not a denial of equal protection to allow a sub-
stitution of facilities when a governmental condemnee
is involved but not in the case of a private condemnee.
When property is condemned, the condemnee must be
indemnified for the loss. The market value standard of
using comparable sales is most frequently employed to
determine just compensation. When comparable sales
are not available, such as in special character property
as we have here, other methods of valuation are utilized,
e.g., the capitalization of earnings or the reproduction
cost minus depreciation standard. No one method of
valuation is exclusive. U.S. v. Virginia Electric Co.,
1961, 365 U.S. 624, 633; U.S. v. Certain Property Located
in the Borough of Manhattan, 2 Cir. 1962, supra. The
Supreme Court has approved the substitution standard as
a proper method of valuation. Brown v. U.S., supra at
82-83.
A refusal to allow the defendant the cost of a sub-
stitute facility because its property is privately owned
does not involve an invidious distinction, but a distinc-
tion on which is both proper and necessary. The loss
by a governmental condemnee is a loss to the public
generally, and the obligation or duty of a replacement
is the responsibility of the public entity and ultimately
the public. The private condemnee lacks the responsibility
to replace the facility. The public through its govern-
mental body is the recipient of compensation for the loss,
while the private condemnee alone receives compensa-
tion for the loss. Finally, the private condemnee may
terminate the substitute facility for the use intended at
a a a
44
any time, but the public condemnee cannot because of its
public duty to continue the service.*
Upon presentation of proper evidence, defendant may
utilize other standards of valuation, other than the com-
parable sales approach, to prove just compensation.
Hickey v. United States, 3 Cir. 1958, 208 F. 2d 269, cert.
denied 1954, 347 U.S. 919; U.S. v. 84.4 Acres of Land,
W.D. Pa. 1963, 224 F. Supp. 1017, rev’d, 348 F. 2d 117;
U.S. v. Certain Property Located in the Borough of
Manhattan, 2 Cir. 1962, supra; U.S. v. Benning Housing
Corporation, 5 Cir. 1960, 276 F. 2d 248; Fairfield Gar-
dens, Inc. v. United States, 9 Cir. 1962, 306 F. 2d 167;
U.S. v. 206.82 Acres of Land, M.D. Pa. 1962, 205 F.
Supp. 91; 4 Nichols, The Law of Eminent Domain
§§ 12.313, 12.32.
In Newton Girl Scout Council v. Massachusetts Turn-
pike Authority, Mass. 1956, 188 N.E. 2d 769, 773-775,
involving the condemnation of a camping facility, the
court speaks of similar valuation problems present here:
2“Here the evidence is without dispute that the school district
must of necessity replace the buildings that the State destroyed by
the taking. The school district is obligated and must have the ad-
ditional classrooms in order to provide the facilities needed by the
school, and consequently there is no way to do it and at the same
time utilize the valuable improvements remaining on the 18.35
acres except by replacement.
“There is a fundamental distinction between obligation resting
on the agency condemning public property, and that of condemning
private property. This distinction lies in the obligation thereby
imposed on the condemnee. For example, a private party owes no
duty to the public to continue its operation either at its original
location or elsewhere. It can move, it can stay, or it can liquidate
as it alone sees fit. Not so with a school system charged with a legal
obligation to the public. A school system suffering the loss of one
of its schools by condemnation must replace that school when the
facility is necessary to the education of its children as shown by
the undisputed evidence in this case. This is the legally imposed
duty on the school district, and it has no other choice.” State v. Waco
Independent School District, Tex. 1963, 364 S.W. 2d 263, 268. See
also City of Wichita v.;Unified School District No. 259, Kan. 1968,
439 P. 2d 162, 168; Jefferson County v. Tennessee Valley Authority,
6 Cir. 1945, 146 F. 2d 564, 565, cert. denied, 1945, 324 U.S. 871;
Level, Evaluation of Special Purpose Properties In Condemnation
Proceedings, supra at 431-432 and 439; cf. Joslin Co. v. Providence,
1923, 262 U.S. 668, 675.
45
“The general rule is that the measure of damages
is the fair market value of the property actually
taken at the time of the taking. .. . In determining
fair market value, the effort is to determine “ ‘the
highest price which a hypothetical willing buyer
would pay to a hypothetical willing seller in an as-
sumed free and open market.”’ Epstein v. Boston
Housing Authority, 317 Mass. 297, 299-300, 58 N.E.
2d 135, 187. All the uses to which the property is
reasonably adapted may be considered. . .. Al-
though its ‘value for any special purpose is not the
test * * * it may be considered, with a view of as-
certaining what the property is worth in the market
for. any use for which it would bring the most.’
Conness v. Commonwealth, 184 Mass. 541, 542-543,
69 N.E. 341. See Smith v. Commonwealth, 210 Mass.
259, 261, 96 N.E. 666; Olson v. United States, 292
U.S. 246, 255, 54 S. Ct. 704, 78 L.Ed. 1236.
“Under the authorities already cited, the Girl
Scouts, in their attempt to show loss of market value,
were plainly entitled to present evidence bearing on
every use to which the property was adapted, in-
cluding (but not limited to) the specialized use for
which the property was being employed effectively
at the time of the taking. It was open to the Girl
Scouts (a) to prove the value of the property for
use by a charitable or religious organization or for
a school group, and the extent to which the taking
had injured or prevented that use; (b) to show the
extent of the market, if any, for properties adapted
for such use; (¢) to establish the general basis on
which such properties change hands when they do
change hands, the various elements of value which
are given weight by organizations naturally in-
terested in the acquisition of such properties, and the
methods by which such properties are usually ac-
quired; and (d) to present evidence of other similar
relevant factors.
‘Tt is not to be expected that the properties
adapted for such a specialized use will have a very
active market or that their market value can be
46
shown by sales of nearby comparable property. Once
developed, such properties are rarely abandoned or
sold. To assist the trier of the fact of value to reach
a just result when such a property is taken by
eminent domain, it frequently will be necessary to
allow much greater flexibility in the presentation of
evidence than would be necessary in the case of prop-
erties having more conventional uses. In such cases,
for example detailed knowledge by expert witnesses
of local prices of land for ordinary residential or
commercial use may be far less helpful than knowl-
edge of conditions (relevant to this particular type
of property) over a wide geographical area and of
the demand for and use of comparable specialized
properties by a particular industry or class of users
or customers. The property may be of a character
where, within fairly wide limits, geographical loca-
tion has less effect on its value than its adaptability
for a particular use. The properties may be of a
type, not frequently bought or sold, but usually ac-
quired by their owners and developed from the
ground up, so that the cost of land plus the reproduc-
tion cost (less depreciation where appropriate) of
improvements may be more relevant than in the
ordinary case.
“The practical problems inherent in the valuation
of such properties have been recognized in the Mass-
achusetts decisions, as well as in the authorities gen-
erally. Special opportunities for proof of value have
long been afforded in cases where it is felt that
there is no market, value, in’the sense in which, in
most communities, market value is at all times re-
flected by a steady volume of sales or ordinary com-
mercial and residential properties. The occasion for
this difference in type of proof (permitting the use
of valuation data other than those factors ordinarily
47
817 U.S. 369, 374, 63 S.Ct. 276, 87 L.Ed. 336. The
courts in these cases, however, may be doing no
more than recognizing that more complex and re-
sourceful methods of ascertaining value must be used
where the property is unusual or specialized in char-
acter and where ordinary methods will produce a
miscarriage of justice. In such cases, it is proper to
determine market value from the intrinsic value of
the property and from its value for the special
purposes for which it is adapted and used. See
Nichols, Eminent Domain (3d ed.) s. 12.32, es-
pecially at pages 134-136, and ss. 18.41[3], 18.42;
Jahr, Eminent Domain, ss. 71, 78, 82 (specialty
uses), 83, 84 (properties of non-profit organiza-
tions) ; Orgel, Valuation under Eminent Domain (2d
ed.) ss. 30, 37-40, especially at pages 177-179, 181-
183; Manify, Damages in Eminent Domain, 34
B.U.L.Rev. 146, 151-152; McCormick, Measure of
Compensation ‘in Eminent Domain, 17 Minn.L.Rev.
461, especially at pages 467-470.
“These unusual problems of proof of damages
most frequently arise in cases of service-type prop-
erties like churches, convents, hospitals, country
clubs, school and college premises and buildings of
religious and charitable societies and similar or-
ganizations. ...
“It is, of course, true that, where there is no
market value, in the sense of a steady current of
sales of similarly used properties in the vicinity, the
burden is on the owner to show that it is impossible
to prove the value of the property without using
some mode of ascertaining value which does not
depend on market value in this sense of the term.
. . . In the present case, however, the Girl Scouts
had amply shown that camps of this type were not
commonly bought and sold.”
bearing on market price) has been expressed in
terms of absence of market value, see comprehen-
sive discussion in Tigar v. Mystic River Bridge
Authority, 329 Mass. 514, 517, 109 N.E.2d 148, or
of market. See, for example, United States v. Miller,
See also Eminent Domain: The Problem of Dainages
Where Land Has Been Adapted to a Special Use, 1957,
37 B.U.L.Rev. 495.
48
Plaintiff’s principal request for pre-trial rulings is
whether the substitution standard is proper in this case.
Both parties are in disagreement on other points be-
cause of their difference on the propriety of the sub-
stitution standard. The standard of valuation to. be
applied will depend largely on the proof presented.* Until
then, the court will reserve ruling on the valuation
standard or standards to be applied.
An appropriate order will issue.
/s/ (Illegible]
Chief Judge
Middle District of Pennsylvania
Dated: January 15, 1974.
* “There is no one way of valuing special purpose properties; each
case will require special consideration. The rules respecting proof
intomalfontion’” Leck teeibeatien of Wied Pecans Pronciene
in on.” , Evaluation of Special Purpose P rties
in Condemnation Proceedings, supra at 439. re
49
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
No. 70-240 Civil
Tract No. 1500
Tract No. 2122
Tract No. 2132
[Filed Jan, 15, 1974]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
In accordance with memorandum this date filed,
It is ORDERED that
1. The cost of substitute facilities is not a proper
measure vf compensation for the taking of defendant’s
property ;
2. All other rulings relative to the valuation standard
or standards to be applied are reserved.
/s/ (Illegible]
Chief Judge
Middle District of Pennsylvania
Dated: January 15, 1974.
50
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
[Filed Apr. 24, 1974]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
Vv,
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN J. LEVKULIC
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA gs
COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA )
John J. Levkulic, being duly sworn according to law,
deposes and says as follows:
1.
Professional Background—I graduated from Pennsyl-
vania State University in 1954 with the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering. From June,
1954 to December, 1955 I was employed as an engineer
at the U.S. Navy Shipyard in Philadelphia. From 1955
to 1957 I served in an engineering capacity with a
United States Navy SeaBees Construction Battalion in
Antigua, Puerto Rico and Cuba. In 1957 I took em-
ployment with Amporico Corporation in an engineering
capacity connected with major construction projects in
Puerto Rico and continued in that professional role until
1962. Since 1962 I have been with Robert F. Miller
Associates, an engineering and architectural firm with
offices in Pottsville and Tamaqua. I have been president
of the firm since 1969. Our firm has on its staff six
registered engineers, one registered architect and three
51 _
engineers with engineering degrees but who are not yet
registered. I am a registered engineer in Pennsylvania
and Puerto Rico and am a member of the Executive
Board of the Pennsylvania Society of Professional
Engineers.
In my professional capacity I have designed state parks,
state highways, state buildings and public school build-
ings and have supervised the letting of many construction
contracts. I have worked up and certified cost estimates
on all public projects on which I have worked as an engi-
neer and on most private projects as well. I have been
involved in many state projects supported by Federal
grants which grants were based on my cost estimates.
2.
Connection With Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod
Camps Project—I, and other members of our firm work-
ing under my supervision, have been in charge of the
engineering design and costing of camp facilities re-
quired by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod to take
the place of Camps Miller, Hagan and Ministerium in
the Tocks Island area of Monroe County. Our work has
progressed to the working drawing stage and our com-
pensation to date has been in excess of $128,000. Our
design calls for relocating the camps at a site acquired
by the Synod in Bear Creek for the length of at least
one mile. Our work has given particular attention to
providing substitute facilities for those existing at Camps
Miller, Hagan and Ministerium on the Delaware River
as of June 15, 1970. In that comnection I have given
attention to the costs involved in replacing such facilities
and particularly to the additional costs resulting:
(a) From Government and other construction require-
' ments applicable to new camps from which pre-existing
camps were exempt,
(b) From the need to provide access to the new site,
(c) From the need to provide roadway and waterline
interconnections within the site, and
(d) From the need to create a dam on Bear Creek to
provide water facilities for aquatic programs at the new
site.
fo I~
52
All cost figures given in this affidavit represent my
professional estimate as of December 1, 1972.
Sewage Facilities—The three old camps provided for
sewage disposal by the use of septic tanks. The Sewage
Facilities Act, as administered by the Department of
Environmental Resources, will not permit a new facility
of the size required to replace Camps Miller, Hagan and
Ministerium to use septic tanks. A complete sewage
treatment plant and connecting sewer lines is an absolute
requirement. The system and lines will cost $434,400 as
compared with a cost of $22,000 for three septic tank
systems with connecting lines. In addition, the sewer
treatment plant. will require maintenance expenses as
listed below, none of which is required by the septic tank
systems at the old camps:
Licensed operator at $150 per week
for 16 weeks per year $2,400.00
Electricity at $100 per month for
four months per year 400.00
Chemicals at $150 per season 150.00
Miscellaneous repairs and maintenance
expense at $500 per year 500.00
Total per year $3,450.00
It thus appears that in order to create lawful functioning
camp facilities an additional net capital cost of $412,400
is required for sewer facilities alone, plus an annual
operating cost of $3,450 for the indefinite future. A
tabulation of the items entering into the cost of the
sewage treatment plant and connecting lines is attached
as Exhibit A. ‘
Department of Environmental Resources Requirements
and Requirements of American Standard National Plumb-
ing Code, as Enforced by Luzerne County, as Affecting
Buildings—Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a tabulation
showing the list of buildings and outdoor facilities at
Camp Ministerium as they existed’on June 15, 1970. On
this exhibit the numbers prefixed by A represent struc-
tures and those prefixed by X represent outdoor facili-
ties, such as tennis courts, base ball and volley ball fields.
Also attached,.as Exhibit C, is a tabulation showing the
list of buildings and outdoor facilities on Camp Miller
at that date. The prefixes B and Y refer, respectively,
to structures and outdoor facilities. Attached as Exhibit
D is a tabulation showing the list of buildings and out-
door facilities at Camp Hagan on that date. The pre-
fixes C and Z refer, respectively, to structures and out-
door facilities. Each of these exhibits shows the esti-
mated cost of replacing such buildings and facilities as
they were on that date, except that in some instances
exact replacement of the item was no longer allowed by
the regulations referred to. The extra cost involved in
compliance is as follows: .
A-1l Dining and recreation hall $ 2,710.00
A-11 Staff house 2,100.00
B-1 Dining Hall 4,895.00
B-2 Recreation hat: 2,430.00
B-9a Wash house 3,640.00
B-9b Wash house 2,580.00
B-15 Wash house 1,060.00
B-16 Wash house 2,800.00
C-1 Dining hall 4,635.00
C-2 Recreation hall 1,215.00
$28,065.00
5
American Camping Association Requirements A ffect-
ing Buildings—Certain requirements enforced by this
Association through its accreditation procedure, particu-
larly with respect to cabin floor space and plumbing fix-
tures, will add substantially to the cost of substituted
facilities. The items of added cost of these requirements,
. again referring to the items tabulated on Exhibits B, C
and D, are as follows:
WEF SS ee oe ee ee .
54
A-7a Campers cabins
A-7b Campers cabins
A-Te Campers cabins
A-7d Campers cabins $ 50,500.00
A-11 Staff house 2,720.00
A-13 Staff house 2,720.00
B-6a Campers cabin
B-6b Campers cabin 22,700.00
B-7c Campers cabin 14,700.00
C-5d Campers cabin 62,920.00
$156,260.00
6.
Substitution of Water Facilities—The old camps had
frontage on the West side of the Delaware River totaling
5,115 feet, and from this access they had the use of the
river for as much as 20 miles in each direction. Con-
struction of a dam on Bear Creek on the new site will
provide a small lake, a much inferior substitute, but it
is all that can be reasonably managed. The proposed
dam will provide 3,000 feet of frontage, inasmuch as the
new camps will be located on both sides of the lake
formed by it. This body of water will provide a 1400
straight linear foot pool for canoes, boats and other
aquatic activities. The cost of the dam will be as follows:
Construction $940,600.00
Erosion control to meet
Department of Environmental
Resources requirements 25,000.00
Soils engineering to satisfy
similar requirements 35,000.00
$1,000,600.00
A tabulation of the items involved in the cost of the
construction of the dam, as above set forth, is attached
as Exhibit E. :
: if
Waterfront Facilities—To replace the waterfront fa-
cilities as they existed at the old camps on June 15, 1970
would involve the following costs:
Miller $44,500
Hagan 17,900
Ministerium 4,800
$67,200
A substitute facility at the new site could be provided
at the lower cost of $47,100. A tabulation of this item
is attached as Exhibit F.
8.
Roadways—The three old camps all had frontage on
public highways which made it unnecessary to have ac-
cess roads and which also served as a means of moving
readily from camp to camp. In fact these highways
passed ‘directly through each camp and provided for ease
of movement within each. The following highway dis-
tances existed within each camp:
Miller — 1600 ft. on L.R. 45012
Ministerium — 2800 ft. on L.R. 45012
Hagan — 1600 ft. on T—515
6000 feet
At the Bear Creek site the location is 1.7 miles from
Pennsylvania Route 115, the nearest public highway. The
cost of an access road from Route 115 to the boundary
of the site of the proposed camps, constructed to comply
with sedimentation and erosion control requirements of
the Department of Environmental Resources, is $253,988.
Roads will be required within the camp site to get
from one camp to another, in excess of the interior road-
ways of the three old camps. At the old camp, by reason
of public highways passing through them, approximately
1800 feet of paved roadway was adequate. Within the
new site approximately 13,200 of paved roadway will be
-required. The cost of the new interior roadways will be
$578,677, whereas the direct replacement cost of 1800
feet of paved roadway at the old site would be only
$40,000.
9.
Bridge—In view of the reduced availability of water
at the new site it is necessary to use both sides of the
Le ae SS -
56
lake created by the proposed dam. To do so requires
construction of a bridge meeting the requirements of the
Department of Environmental Resources. Such a bridge
will cost $76,000. Final plans for the bridge have been
approved by the Department of Environmental Resources.
A tabulation is attached as Exhibit G showing in detail
the cost of both the bridge and the required roadway.
Not included in the tabulation is a further item of $10,-
000 of cost which will be incurred in order to insure
compliance with sedimentation and erosion control re-
quirements.
10.
Power Lines—The three old camps had access directly
on their internal boundary to public power lines. At the
new site the lines will have to be brought a distance of
1.7 miles from the power lines on Route 115 at a cost of
$47,000.
) a
Water System—To create a functional substitute for
the water systems at the old camps would cost $478,905
whereas a direct replacement cost of the old systems
would be $302,000. The differential is accounted for by
two factors, one being the longer lines required in the
new camps and the other being the matter of pipe size.
As a matter of engineering practice it would be intoler-
able to replace exactly the old sizes. A tabulation of the
detail of the water system substitute is attached as
Exhibit H.
/s/ John J. Levkulic
JOHN J. LEVKULIC
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me this 9th
day of August, 1973.
/s/ Shirley Fox
SHIRLEY Fox
Notary Public
Philadelphia, Philadelphia County
My Commission Expires: —
February 13, 1975
57
EXHIBIT A
LUTHERAN CAMP
BEAR CREEK
SEWAGE SYSTEM
UNIT
QUANTITY DESCRIPTION PRICE TOTAL
22,200 L.F. 8” Vitrified Clay Pipe 8.00 $177,600.00
9,300 L.F. 6” Vitrified Clay Pipe 7.50 69,750.00
72 Ea. Manholes (Various Depths) 700.00 50,400.00
14 Ea. Cleanouts 120.00 1,680.00
es Sewage Treatment Plant
Building & Equipment 125,000.00
1 Sedimentation and
- Erosion Control 10,000.00
TOTAL $434,430.00
58
ExuHisiT B
Proposed tabulations of bid items for Outdoor and Building
Facilities Type A and X originally located at Camp Ministerium.
Facility Unit Total
No. Qty. Description Cost Cost
Al 1 Dining & Recreation Hall $147,188.00 $147,188.00
A2 — (See Bldg. Facility B-18) — —
A3 1 Caretakers Residence at
Maintenance 68,865.00 68,865.00
A4 1 Storage Shed at Main-
tenance (Combined
with Ab & Al5) 14,389.00 14,389.00
A5 — (See Bldg. Facility A4) —_— —_
A6 1 Camp Directors Residence
at Hagan 68,556.00 68,556.00
A7 16 Campers Cabins 16,160.00 258,560.00
A8 1 Shower House 42,729.00 42,729.00
A9 — Well and Pump House Contract 2 —
A10 2 Garage at Maintenance 21,472.00 42,944.00
All 1 Staff Cabin 44,046.00 44,046.00
Al2 2 Classroom Building 39,887.00 79,774.00
A138 1 Staff Cabin 44,046.00 44,046.00
Al4 1 Classroom Building 39,782.00 39,782.00
Al5 — (See Building Facility
A4) — ==
Al6 Tent Platforms 1,419.00 9,933.00
X1 Baseball with Backstops
and Home Plate 6,000.00 6,000.00
X2 1 Basketball 2,800.00 2,800.00
x3 1 Badminton 530.00 530.00
x4 1 Badminton 530.00 530.00
X65 1 Badminton at HAGAN 530.00 530.00
X6 1 Badminton at HAGAN 530.00 530.00
X7 — Beach Front (Contrac
1 & 2) P — —
x8 1 Flagpole 1,130.00 1,130.00
Total Cost Building and Outdoor Facilities, Types A and X
for Camp Ministerium.
SUBTOTAL
$872,862.00
59
Exuiir C
Proposed tabulations of bid items for Outdoor and Building Facili-
ties Type B and Y originally located at Camp Miller.
Facility Unit Total
No. Qty. Description Cost Cost
Bl 1 Dining Hall $181,398.00 $181,398.00
B2 1 Recreation Hall 95,337.00 95,337.00
B3
C4 1 Infirmary 69,418.00 69,418.00
B4 1 Camp Director Residence 68,556.00 68,556.00
Maintenance reer
b 1 14,389.00
B6 8 Campers Cabins 15,050.00 120,400.00
B7 14 Campers Cabins 18,494.00 258,916.00
B8 1 Shower House 44,337.00 44,337.00
B9 2 Wash House 14,900.00 29,800.00
B10 1 Office at Ministerium 24,968.00 24,968.00
Bil 1 Visitors Latrine at
Administration 12,595.00 12,595.00
B12 Canteen with Main Office
C10 1 at Administration 41,998.00 41,998.00
B13 1 Arts and Crafts 40,279.00 40,279.00
B14 1 Staff Cabin 25,588.00 25,588.00
B15 1 Wash House 15,606.00 15,606.00
B16 1 Staff Cabin 25,588.00 25,588.00
B17 8 Barn at Maintenance 21,521.00 64,563.00
B18 1 Storage Shed’at Main-
tenance (Combined with
A2 and C13) 14,389.00 14,389.00
B19 3 Tent Platforms 1,419.00 4,257.00
B20 7 Tent Platforms 1,419.00 9,933.00
Yl 1 Tennis at Ministerium 3,500.00 3,500.00
Yy2 1 Volleyball at Ministerium 800.00 800.00
WY ae
aS
her ae!
60
Exhibit C—Continued
Facility Unit Total
No. Qty. Description Cost Cost
Y3 1 Basketball 2,800.00 2,800.00
Y4 1 Badminton 530.00 530.00
Y5 4 Archery Range 650.00 2,600.00
Y6 1 Basketball 2,800.00 2,800.00
Y7 1 Outdoor Chapel 6,100.06 6,100.00
Y8 1 Baseball with Backstop and
Home Plate 6,000.00 6,000.00
Y9 1 Volleyball 800.00 800.00
Y10 1 Tennis) 3,100.00
Yili 1 Tennis) 3,100.00 6,200.00
Y12 1 Badminton 530.00 530.00
Y13 2 Shuffleboard 1,250.00 2,500.00
y14 1 Basketball 2,800.00 2,800.00
Y15 1 Badminton 530.00 530.00
Y16 1 Baseball (No Backstop)
with Home Plate 5,500.00 5,500.00
Y17 1 Volleyball 800.00 800.00
Y18 1 Amphitheater 8,500.00 8,500.00
Y19 — Beachfront (Contracts
#1 and #2) — _—
Y20 1 Flagpole 1,130.00 1,130.00
Total Cost Building and Outdoor Facilities, Type B and Y
for Camp Miller
TOTAL $1,231,416.00
61
EXHIBIT D
Proposed tabulations of bid items for Outdoor and Building Facili-
ties Type C and Z originally located at Camp Hagan.
Facility Unit Total
No. Qty. Description Cost Cost
C1 1 Dining Hall $163,773.00 $163,773.00
C2 1 Recreation Hall 84,322.00 84,322.00
C3 1 Arts and Crafts 40,279.00 40,279.00
C4 — (See Building Facility
B3/C4) ae oom
C5 18 Camper Cabins 24,722.00 444,996.00
C6 2 Wash Houses 14,905.00 29,810.00
C7 1 Staff Cabin 25,588.00 25,588.00
C8 1 Staff Cabin 25,588.00 25,588.00
C9 1 Staff Cabin 25,588.00 25,588.00
C10 — (See Building Facility — —
Cll 1 Administrative Directors
Residence 66,842.00 66,842.00
C12 6 Tent Platforms 1,419.00 1,419.00
C13 — (See Building Facilities
B18) _ withe
STP 1 Control Building, Sewage
Treatment Plant Contract 2
Z1 1 Outdoor Chapel 6,100.00 6,100.00
Z2 8 Archery Range 650.00 1,950.00
Z3 1 Baskethall 2,800.00 2,800.00
ZA 1 Shuffleboard 1,250.00 1,250.00
' ZB 1 Tennis “ourt) 3,100.00
Z6 1 Tennis Court) 3,100.00 6,200.00
Z7 1 Basketball 2,800.00 2,800.00
Z8 1 Volleybail 800.00 800.00
Z9 1 Volleyba’l 800.00 800.00
Z10 1 Baseball with Backstop
and Homeplate 6,000.00 6,000.00
00°009‘0F6$ TV.LOL
00°009 09's “TT 002 (MOU Z°AL) GONTA ‘BT
00°090'S G28 mc ie | OLs ‘1.9 ‘AdId AVIO ‘LIA ‘IT
00°0S9‘TIT Sa 61 ‘“X'O 008‘s UAAVI .ZI ‘dVU-dIU GAOWId-GNVH ‘OT
00°00L‘02 oP's ‘K'O osr'z UAAV'I .b2 ‘dVU-dIM GAdWNAAG ‘6
00°008‘9T 00°0T ‘X'O 0s9'T GANOLS GHHSNYO °8
00°00P‘Z8 00°000'TL Bes | aNO SHUOM LOUILNO ‘L
00°000‘FZS 00°0ST “K'O rh) a GALAYONOO LNAWGO GCHOUOANITDY ‘9
9 00°000‘S9T 00°OIT “AD 009'T GLAYONOO LNAWAO NIVId ‘8
00°000°F 00°8 ‘XO 00s TIld ATAAOO F THAVY™ ‘ANVS ‘PF
00°000°9 00% “K'O 000‘8 TId JO NOILOVdWOO TVIOUdS ‘8
00°000'r8 00'T ‘XO 000‘FS LNAWANVENA AVG GALOVdNOO @
00°000‘SLT$ 00% $ ‘X'O 00998 QgaIMISSVIONN ‘NOLLVAVOXS ‘T
LNOONV quad LINN ALILNVND Wali
LIND
TON LOVULNOO dNVO NVUFHLNAI ‘NWVd ANVI Yada
ALVWILSA LSOO AGaYZINALI
q LaiHxy
$85 8 988lo 28
oO oS
ie? oan ec eS See
ia) 10 a = On st OO x
» &
~~
Ss S$SS8 q
» o oS %
#8) 22 | RRSSag .
=) mo oD a oN ge wl 5
3 =
a 3 : 3 P|
be ‘SO
3 §
- ; s| 38 8 8 a, &
PH 29H..5 |
~ °
ax 3 4 2 |
ee2 gs FES EES
9 fe E nN g 2a B= ;
a
> 8
asia 82 2288 &ae
“| N NNR RAR FZ Se
ou Be
00°00T‘LES TVLOL HOVGE $
00°002‘ST 8] Yoweg youg
00°0F9‘ST HOVad HOVa
00°026‘9F SHOVE $ YOU TVLOL
00°000‘T S[ByUeprouy
00°090‘T oo'oss li. IBY Y3IH preny azry ‘eq §
00°00T's ame pavog Surarq Surywopy ‘ea §
a m
(00°098 (2) Std g
OO'OTS’s = (00°098 IX .b Ob — §
(00°0z8 ‘aa g3'@
IX EX GX OP jem ‘eq §
00'000‘2 00°000°2 [O1}U0D UOIsoIg ‘Surdvospuey ‘a1
00°0z8‘F 00'8 QIN “U0D UreLg FZ xX OT ‘AT OFS 29
00°008'8T 00's PUBS Yoweg 714M feANZeN 9 ‘A'S 001'9 Tg
00°00z‘zT 00°2 PSINOD OFBg “71g [10g _,p ‘A'S 00T'9 09
00'0rr's ¢ oro ¢ epeisqng ‘A'S 0019 6
IVLOL aod NOILdIwosaa ALILNVND
S LINA
FIND OID Jo -I"T OFS Aq payoojorg
eniiicadane 6
AS O09 = Mize VEO
SHHOVA $ JO NOILONXLSNOD HOV
ZL6I ‘T tequiaceg
@°ON LOVULNOO
MAGNO Uvag
dNVO NVYAHLAT
ad LaiHxg
00°s99‘868$ AAOGV AO TVLOL
00°000‘92 ‘S"I e3plig ‘eq I %
00°092'T 00°08 eplqoyyy wn1a,eD uoL, ZZ ¥%
00°00F'T 00°02 suol}oeg pug edig "eA 02 8%
00°009‘0T 0g'T SONIC F SopeMS eFeureiq ‘AT 000'L Fad
5 00°009's 00°09 SITPMpBeH *O'O'U ‘ea PT Iz
00°000'TZ 00°hT adig ‘Duo yueuIED padl0zuley ,,8T ‘AT 009'T 02
00°0L8'F 00°6T adig ‘duo yueUIED) peol0zuleY ,,6Z ‘AT 082 61
00°009's 00°Sz adig “OU0D JUEUIED psdI0zUIEY 0S ‘AT OFT 8I
00°099"L 00°22 adig “‘U0D jueUIED peorosuIEY 9g ‘IT 082 LI
00°098'LT 00°98 adig ‘Duo jusuIED pedtosuley 8h ‘aT O19 91
00°000‘0T 00°08 adi ‘2U0D yusuIED pedi0suleYy ,,ZL ‘AT S92I gt
00°009‘0T 00'S rey preny “AT 0098 vr
00°002‘0Z oh'0 Jepinoys ,9°Z ‘AT 000'9F SI
00°009'F 09'0 Jepmnoys .g “AT 0026 ra
00°00‘0T 020 Jepinoys ,9 “AT 000’9T It
00°000'9T 08'0 Jep[noys .8 ‘IT 00002 or
00°S28'98 9z'T SIBLING [BLIOIVW WOPE .9 "A'S 009°62 6
00°00T‘LT 08°0 apeisqng ‘A'S 000‘L9 .
00°09'8r 98°0 "BBY 9U0}g ‘POW VZ WF ‘A'S 000‘L9 L
00°008"90T 01% @SINOD OSBY “DUD "NIIG .,b ‘K'S 00068 9
00°009'99 08's PLINOD OSB “DUCD "NIIg .,9 ‘A'S 009°LT 9
00°002'L6 08°I V2—dl «Az ‘A'S 000'9 oa
2 00°009‘sz 0s'T UONFBABOXY MOLIOg "K'O 000°6P 8
00°000°L02 08'T WOTJBABOXY ‘K'O 000‘STT z
00°000'Lz $ 00°009$ qnity 3 reap IV oP I
TVLOL aoldd NOILdIYOSaa ALILNVNO
LINA
AVAMAVOU
ZLGT ‘T Tequieseq
2 ON LOVULNOO
MaqaO AVA
dNVO NVUFHLNAT
t) LIGIHXxy
68
ExHisir H
LUTHERAN CAMP
BEAR CAMP
WATER SYSTEM
QUANTITY DESCRIPTION
UNIT
1,000 L.F.
3,550 L.F.
11,400 L.F.
5,800 L.F.
300 L.F.
1,200 L.F.
8,000 L.F.
5 Ea.
9 Ea.
9 Ea.
24 Ea.
3 Ea.
3 Ea.
1 Ea.
2 Ea.
teil
6” Cast Iron Pipe
6” Cast Iron Pipe
4” Cast Iron Pipe
4” Cast Iron Pipe
3” Cast Iron Pipe
2” Cast Iron Pipe
1” Copper Pipe
Drinking Fountains
6” to 8” Gate Valve &
Valve Box
3” to 4” Gate Valve &
Valve Box
1” to 2” Gate Valve &
Valve Box
Pumphouse
Well & Pumphouse
Equipment
30,000 Gal. Storage Tank
Complete
50,000 Gal. Storage Tank
Complete
TOTAL
PRICE TOTAL
$ 10.00 $ 10,000.00
10.00 35,500.00
6.70 76,380.00
6.70 38,860.00
5.30 1,590.00
4.00 4,800.00
4.00 32,000.00
640.00 3,200.00
300.00 2,700.00
140.00 1,260.00
60.00 1,440.00
4,725.00 14,175.00
14,000.00 42,000.00
65,000.00 65,000.00
75,000.00 150,000.00
$478,905.00
69
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
[Filed Apr. 24, 1974]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
es
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS SITUATE IN MON-
ROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, COMMONWEALTH OF PENN-
SYLVANIA, AND BENEDICT F. PASTORINI, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS
- AFFIDAVIT OF REV. ROY E. GULLIFORD
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA )
)
COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA )
The Reverend Roy E. Gulliford, being duly sworn ac-
cording to law, deposes and says as follows:
1,
Identity of Affiant—Since March 1, 1970, I have been
Executive Director of Camps Miller, Hagan and Minister-
ium which until June 15, 1970, were owned by the South-
eastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Lutheran Church in
America, and operated on its behalf. In my capacity as
Executive Director, I have had complete responsibility
for, and oversight of, the operation of these camps, in-
- cluding their programs and policies, as well as all bud-
getary, accounting and financial matters.
Site Location—These three camps were, and Camps
Hagan and Ministerium still are, located directly upon
the Delaware River in Monroe County, Pennsylvania at
70
Shawnee on the Delaware. For many decades the aquatic
activities have been the core of their program. The river
front was well equipped with landings and beaches for
swimming and canoeing. Our equipment inventory in-
cludes 25 canoes which are constantly and extensively
used for trips for which the location is unusually suit-
able, the Delaware being safely and easily navigable by
canoe for at least 20 miles in each direction. It includes
in addition 12 playaks and six rowboats actively used in
the aquatic programs. The interior of the camps fronts
on a paved public highway which makes the sites readily
accessible with a minimum of driveway and public utility
line construction inside the camp limits.
3.
Condemnation and Lease Back—These three camps
were condemned by the United States on June 15, 1970.
The structures on Camp Miller were extensively van-
dalized and promptly razed, rendering it of no further
use as a camp after the 1970 season. .Following the con-
demnation Camps Hagan and Ministerium were leased
back to us by the United States of America at a rental
of $15,600 per year, and the camp program has con-
tinued at Camps Hagan and Ministerium without inter-
ruption to the present date.
4
Church Affiliation and Financial Support—Prior to
condemnation the camps were titled in the name of the
Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the Lutheran Church
in America. The camp program, however, is conducted
in the name of the Eastern Pennsylvania Lutheran Camp
Corporation, a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation, the
board of directors of which is appointed by the presi-
dent of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod of the
Lutheran Church in America and the Northeastern Penn-
sylvania Synod of the Lutheran Church in America on
a joint basis. This corporation is the agency of both
synods for the purpose of conducting the camping pro-
gram and is financially supported by both. Direct synod
financial support by appropriations for operating ex-
penses in recent years has been:
71
1965 $13,746
1966 15,030
1967 16,026
1968 14,627
1970 14,450
1971 23,003
1972 28,228
1973 28,228
5.
Camp Eligibility—For more than 40 years both Camps
Miller and Hagan have served boys and girls from age
8 to age 16. There has never been any restriction on
the basis of race, creed or color, nor is there any policy
of giving priority in registration to any religious de-
nomination. Registrations are accepted strictly on a first
come first served basis. Camp Ministerium has for more
than ten years been operated as a small group camp
for boys and girls from age 9 to 17 with no restrictions
as to race, creed or color, and no policy of giving priority
to the members of any religious denomination. All ap-
plicants are accepted on a first come first served basis
and, in fact, diversity is essential to meaningful small
group camping.
6.
Special Need Campers—Determined effort has always
been made to serve children with special needs, whether
mental, psychological or financial. Among these children
are the mentally retarded at White Haven State School,
White Haven, Pennsylvania, the psychologically disturbed
children at Silver Springs School, Plymouth Meeting,
Pennsylvania, the poor boys sent to camp by the Tri-
Square Masonic group, and the poor children who come
to camp under our own Campership Program.
In the case of White Haven, we have had in the 1973
season seven severely retarded children for whom the
.School pays our regular rates, notwithstanding their
care must be very individual and therefore very expen-
sive to us.
In the case of Silver Springs, we have had 20 dis-
turbed children in the 1973 season. Again the School
pays standard rates notwithstanding the special care
required.
72
In the case of the Tri-Square Masonic program we
have had the following utilization paid for at standard
rates by that organization:
1969 43 boys
1970 38 boys
1971 65 boys
1972 55 boys
, 1973 42 boys
In our own Campership Program, we have had the
following numbers in recent years, which represent about
10% of our total enrollment volume:
1970 92 underprivileged campers for 149 weeks
1971 106 underprivileged campers for 161 weeks
1972 115 underprivileged campers for 208 weeks
1973 161 underprivileged campers for 239 weeks
These children are largely sent to us by child care agen-
cies in eastern Pennsylvania, principally in Wilkes
Barre, Scranton, Allentown, Bethlehem, Easton and
Philadelphia. The cost of these children is met by a
special fund raising effort which I conduct among in-
dividuals, service clubs, Lutheran congregations and
wherever I can interest people in helping children in this
way. Additional funds are raised by the special efforts
of the president of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod
of the Lutheran Church in America.
a
Racial and Religious Distribution—We do not keep
records showing separately white and non-white enroll-
ments. My observation, however, is that during my ten-
ure from 10 to 15% of our campers are non-white, and
that about 5% of our counsellor staff is non-white. Re-
ligious distribution figures have been maintained for
Camps Miller and Hagan since 1965 and they show the
following:
Lutheran Non-Lutheran
1965 59% 41%
1966 60% 49%
1967 62% 38%
1968 64% 34%
1969 61% 39%
1970 . 48% 57%
1971 41% 59%
1972 45% 55%
73
As stated above, no racial or religious group is favored
in the matter of admissions. The foregoing distribution
results from the application of a first come first serve
policy except that the special need groups to which I
have referred are assured priority.
8.
Fees Paid by Campers—The schedule of weekly fees
prevailing over the last ten years is as follows:
Lutheran Non-Lutheran
1963 $30 $32
1964 30 32
1965 32 34
1966 32 34
1967 36 38
1968 36 38
1969 45 47
1970 45 47
1971 45 55
1972 49 59
1973 49 59
It should be noted that when we receive contributions
from their sponsors, all Campership children are ad-
mitted at the lower rate regardless of church affiliation.
The foregoing fees fall far short of meeting the expenses
of operation. The following figures are illustrative and
in connection with them it is to be noted that the ex-
pense figures shown do not include anything for deprecia-
tion or general administrative overhead:
1969—Fees and contributions
in lieu of fees received $191,782.87
Operating expense 205,738.93
1970—Fees and contributions
in lieu of fees received 151,942.84
Operating expense 175,521.21
1971—Fees and contributions
in lieu of fees received 121,031.00
Operating expense 179,582.00
1972—Fees and contributions
in lieu of fees received 122,611.00
Operating expense 177,545.00
74
9.
Comparison with Camp William Penn—This camp is
owned by the City of Philadelphia and is located in Mon-
roe and Pike Counties, Pennsylvania, about nine miles
north of Marshalls Creek. It is managed under the
direction of Henry Windish, Administrative Assistant to
the Recreation Commissioner of the City of Philadelphia.
It is comparable to the combined Camps Hagan and
Ministerium as presently operated. Some points of com-
parison applicable in the current year are as follows:
Length of season:
William Penn 81% weeks
Hagan and Ministerium 9 weeks
Average campers per week :
William Penn 320
Hagan and Ministerium 335
Operating budget per season:
William Penn $129,000
Hagan and Ministerium 177,500
In connection with the foregoing cost and budget figures,
it should be noted that Camp William Penn has some
operating expenses taken care of outside of its budget.
For example, all its laundry is done in Philadelphia pris-
ons at no cost. All of its motor vehicles are supplied and
maintained by the City at no cost. Mr. Windish’s salary
is paid by the Philadelphia Department of Recreation
as is his office overhead. There are some differences also
in its program. William Penn has no canoes and no
aquatic activities other than swimming on the lake on
which it is located. Its counsellors also are on a different
qualification and compensation scale. At Hagan and
Ministerium all counsellors (except for five high school
seniors) are high school graduates at least and are paid
a minimum of $375 per season, whereas at William Penn,
41 of 90 counsellors have not finished high school and
those who have not finished high school are paid $200
per season.
75
10,
Government Assistance—Our camps are eligible for
participation in the U.S. Department of Agriculture Spe-
cial Milk Program which reimburses us at the rate of
two cents per half pint of milk served persons at our
camp under 21 years of age. This subsicy amounts to
approximately $1,200 per year. A copy of an illustrative
voucher form is attached as Exhibit A.
We are also eligible for U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture surplus food and through this program receive such
provisions as peanut butter, rice, flour, oatmeal and the
like. What we receive depends upon the quantities of
the various surplus items available. They vary widely.
The monetary value of commodities received in recent
years is:
1971 $2,249.00
1972 1,935.00
1973 2,189.60
Eligibility for this program requires full compliance with
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which, accord-
ing to the agreement entered into between our camps
and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as administrator
for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, requires that
“No person in the United States shall, on the ground
of race, color or national origin, be excluded from par-
ticipation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to
discrimination under any program or activity of re-
cipient agency to which assistance is provided by the
United States Department of Agriculture. Admission
policies are understood and agreed by recipient agency
to be a part of such programs and activities.” Our camps
have never violated these conditions nor have they ever
been challenged with having done so. A copy of the
agreement and related materials is attached as Exhibit
B.
The real estate on which the camps operated has al-
ways been exempt from township, county and school dis-
trict real estate taxes because the camps are “institu-
tions of purely public charity.”
76
11,
Public Demand—There is a growing cail for the serv-
ices which our camps render. For most of our regular
sessions there are waiting lists which cannot be taken
care of. Demand from specialized groups is also mount-
ing. The White Haven State School desires that we
operate a day camp for 30 to 40 retarded children. The
Luzerne County Child Development Council requests us
to accept 75 to 100 emotionally and physically handi-
capped children in a day camp program.
/s/ Roy E. Gulliford
Roy E. GULLIFORD
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me this 9th
day of August, 1973.
/s/ Shirley Fox
SHIRLEY Fox
Notary Public
Philadelphia, Philadelphia County
My Commission Expires:
February 13, 1975
=e
17
W LIGInXxa
ETLISTT TT] = €26T “AON
etri fetol = ef6t “en :eTdmexg
*SIBZAOD ISYONOA
STY} azeeX pue yQuOM ey Jo Jequnu 9yy AeRUZ =f
*qufd-jyey
aed e82ey> eSereae 2z9QuUe ‘stseq AT TEP *quewes13e
@ wey. 29420 UO pros st yTT™ ZI ( [OFZ] 0] ay. JO yY eTNpeyos uF uMoYSs se quyad ao edfy) O€
se sjiodez - sjue> Zz :eTduexe) sieTTop :
Jou sued Jo sm192 ut E8rzeYD AOYS “ATT jo WALL
quyd-yyey zed ueapryy> 02 eZ1zeyo ey 2983uUg OT
“MOHD LNAIWASENGKITY ENA
. ST a
*sTequex 10 seseyoind ONIAVIGG GIOAVY OL DNITIVA FAOAIA AFHONOA SINL NOIS
quemdtnbe 203 eZ1eyo Aue spnyTouF Jou og OL aunS aq ‘per eTdwoo Aqtzedoad jou JF NOILIAWIOD
ToRIS TO) Se yaodey -squeo OT/y ¢ :eTdwexe) YOA CANUNLIA AG TTIM WIVIO UNOA °329257° UF Sejes
; SA€TIOp 2ou sjues jo em1eq ut soFad AoYS uo peseq ‘yasn Aq pejndmoo eq TTT“ quewesinqute.z
*ZUNODSTp 2937Te AOINGTAISTP ATT 02 pred jo qunomy ‘ATuo yuo AepueTed eUO 20ZF BIEP zazodey,
ATYUA JO 3uyd-zTey zed eozad Tenjoe ey. 3293uT 6
*sexog jo dnoi8
j *Sp10D9e2 SduUepUsz Ie Worzy sty? yore ut 3YyBTX syQ 02 SeTAqUS [Te pzocvesey *x0suods
SOvFMIASISp SOFJJO S,A0JeAWsTuTUpe Tooyos aya Aq 3dey eq oste 3asnu Adod-y *2eyonNoA eq.
eyy “Aep Tooydss yoee 203 (QuemMpToOIUe OU) &q peireao> yquom ey} BSufMoT TOF yQuom Sy2 JO YIOT
eouEpue {Ie ESerzeae Tenjoe Aequy ssTooyds 9 242 UeYI AsIeT JOU OSz0Z Od ‘uo qBusysey *‘yasn ‘eoFA
ss -195 UOTIFAINN pue poog ‘uoTSsTATd Sup{unooosy wes
*peares sea yTTW skep JO rzequmuU TeNjoe JejUq ¢ -o1g pue soueuty 03 Adod suo pue TeuySyzszo Apfaqns
*uoz3e1edo
8, qIUuOM Baz IUe ey 203 eIEP Buy zo0dex anof jo Ty epnyTIOUT prnoys nok sxoyer9uU],
“yQuow ewes ey) 103 SIeYONoA sNofasad TTe spyoa ATeIeTdwoD YIHONOA GAISACAV NV *aLON Tv10ad$
SNOILSNSISNI
A"INO WYUSOUd YAWWNS “widads 4Od ASN
“NIVINad ABH1L HOIHM OL MVBA D¥DSIiad SHL SO ONS BHI UBLAY SHINOW £ ONY SUVBA © 20 GOlIuad V wos
atonv Bunina uoa BIG vVilivaAyv ONY CBNIVISY BG LSNW BSYHOUNG AO BINBOIAS BVBH1LO ONY “SBDIOCANI ‘Sid!IBDBu NIV
4 wOSNOGS AO BUNivrnois a wits NOlLvuVdse 40 Bivo
*peateces Gaeq 70U Sey 20930) JuUaWAE yEY PU ‘(S)UaWasTY ZuNStxe JO Sua? OY) TIM SOUTPIOIIS Uy S! 3] ISU) SA@YINOA STUY
qs0dGnse ©) SIQTIJTAT Ore SpI0Ie! YY) “SpIedGe2 [je Uy 7991209 PUT OMI) S} JBYONOA STG} *ya112q pus sZpatmouy Au Jo 760q OY) 07 IBY) AALLUFD 1-1
fia 0 =
AINO 35N SNA NOS
LJ
: cs s
aa La
r{ : zs x @ © RQ SEsSyS THN “SS te ce oe Se ve €€ FE
Bae ****pasoaeyun (q)- ES Td sseeees pauoaeyy (8). SeEREERER seteeeesewersanenes peseysund syuyd 5; jo sequny “Z
oe E
anes syjuez = ©jued
ejoun 19"UM -
(qun02s}p 20378 291;ddns 0) pied) 411 jo wId Y JO 3802 ITUN, 6
eeeereceeesenee (ee enujw £ wsozs) verPITyD (9)
tr iy oF ce ;
ceases Ppeoas;] y (2) RREM PPPTTTTTTT TTT TTT TTT a hel sunpy ()
yord % sed pityo 10) paases Squrd % Jo seQuUnN “gs
: UVaA HINOW
BONVONZLIV . HLINOW SIHL 48Od3uy SIH AG
AVVO BOVEBAY “9 | SAVO ONILYEadO 40 ‘ON T¥1C4 ‘§] O3¥3A0D GOIU3a + GWYD UC NOILAALLSNI “IOOHDS 4O SSBUCCe CNY Shine
- , (WwuDONd MSWAWNS WiID3dS)
ares. ak Serene ‘“hO26l Vd ONLIVI2 ‘HINOW
Sn, saetege ps c ONILNOG SY MW IWWIDBds
Sa gets cs, al SGOE XOS] vos awa waae wvuDoud
, i ayy busSISYG] | Sv UaHONOA '
wOsnods wo AsmonsMe edde TEONOE so uN Hiv t OBL LIMaNS MBHONOA L4NaWasuNGNtaY
Pap 0 wit = ' ’ AjsnotAaudd [*s kee
Sd 2 - =, “ON” ONV UBHONOA FeO ts
— Seu sere 9 ee 9 x08 ‘POAURS NOILIWAAN ONY GOO4 "
serio dadae tis meV OM mdencastamden Dede Ni aX. BDV 1d _J}iinonov so ANaWLevaad “s"n L0e-SN4 WUOd”
¥
ePStu-Or ‘ON HO CBACUGEY NHOs
78
ey ea cma @ LIGIHxa
7G. 5 /
“EL6T UF AQTATPOR Gweo sewwNs Tnysseoons ysow e 207 SOYSTM 4Seq
* OG _OSTS ZEnwW SIFEUUOTZSENd dweo rewuMs oy JO setTdoo peyoeyze ous agree
UBYy 109CT OU NeEINg Sty OF peurNzer eq ysnu suIOy eseyy JO YoRS J° setdoo eax
ait "uosees Supdweo €/6T 8y Bupanp spooy pezeuop JO Ydyeocer ey} 10y suOy Quew
“OO12B PESOTOUS SY} JO Satdoo seryz TTe ‘£qorTQUe ATeYy UT Cennraes eseoty
“9988 JNOUZ TM ESN pue 81038 ATzedoid ueo nok eyeoTpuT nok 4ey4 Spooy esoyz JO seTR
“Fouenb ey yyzm Nok ATddns 04 epew eq TTT pLOFFe Azeaq =*dweo ey} JO zequnu quew
~ee138 pue eweu 943 pue pertsep AyTpowwoo yore JO £4TQUeNb ey} Butstape ‘nearing stu
3083U00 eseetd ‘pepesu ere soTyTpowwoo pezoT.z4Ser1uN JO settddns TeuoTyTppe gI
“neoing STY} pue SINyMo}pAsy JO yuewzredeq seqeqg poztup
“@oTAreG UOTZFIGNN pue poog ‘eotsZO TeuopSey y10K MeN eux Aq ‘set ;pOUMWOD SuyA Teoes
e10yeq ‘peaordde are sqyoerquo0o pure sTseq VOTAIOS“10J-eay @ UO ATUO JOT pezoRIQUOD
Ore SOOPAIGS YONS Jeyy SutpTAoid ‘uvoptzer9edo Butpesy rTeuy ONpuco 04 seTuedWOD
@oTares pooy AOTdwe Lew setyTpoumioo eateocer 04 exrTsep YOTYyM sdueo zewwng
* SOT} Tpowuog
pezeuog JO Softtdans Tenptser so q10der A10jUeAUT YNO-esSOTO UOSeES due o-jJO-pue
Ue QyTA neeINg Sty eppAoid 07 pertnber st dweo oy3 ‘osty ‘uosees eu} TOF duweo
OY} JO SSOTS OYY UOodN ATEZeTpeUWT AZTTTORJ UoTQNQTz4YSTpP-qns Suynssy ey} 02 peurmngzer
oq ysnw Wsees ZuTdweo eyy JO esOTO ey ye A1OQUSAUT UT Spooy pezeuop Tty
° *werZ01d Jutpesy s,dweo oyy yo smetaarx uoTzyoedsuT pertnbar ButyzeTdwoo ut
OMY MoOPIZy JO Quewz1edeq seyeqg pezrug ey} JO Teuuosied pue neering sTyR JO seat ze
“queseidar pte 0% Sewy} TTe 4e STQeTTeAe eq 4snw UOSzed STQeSZpeTMOUy SUo YSveT 4e
pue eptedweo eyz 7B peuyequTew oq yen spooy pezeuop TT® JO ArOQueAUT quero pus
WOFPSSTT FAN ‘eqdtece: Jo sproocsy *perteoer spooy peqzeuop TTe JO uopWezrTTyn zedo1d
- pus e8e1098 eqenbope xzoy epyaord ysnu set Tpowwoo BupAytece: sdweo zewuwng
*OINZTROFIZY FO Quewzredegq sezeys peqtun ey
JO suezaid peystsse-ATTe1epey UT uoTeUTWTIOSTpP-UOU BuTULEOUOD “HOST JO qoy SAUITY
THFO 943 F° TA OTIFL JO Suctstaord ey} YQTm ‘TTezyep AreAe ut ‘ATdWOD 03 partbar
e218 seyousse Bupiosuods dweo zeuums ‘ATTeUCTYTppy *seTzTpouNIOD pezeuop jo ydyeoar
64} UF SzedToTyred 07 STQTITTe ere MOTeq 10 e3e TOOYos YITY JO UsIPTTYO .OF sdueo
cewums QTzOrd-uou ATuO 4eyy pep UTWwer ore SepoueZe Butzosuods dues iewumg
* * * peqotep eq Aew seTzTpowwoo Jo seTyeTz1eA
YR JO GWOS JO SOTZOTIeA Pooy TeEUOTYTPPe YRTM pequewNe eq few BuyASTT STUL *aION
eqeY pozyoTrySeyx
* qeSN pouueos She
FV wgieweemamees” SEE oi £4 sueeg fr
: #T SJE0 PETTY
' #T . ATH £1q Feq{-uoQ ;
#T "q20ys “Zap ° #2 IN0TZ "dV
SOTy #T Teswur0g9
#T
| #T 198 4gNg
*ATFEP STeew oaryy ueyy SSeT GarEsS Jey} Sdweo esoyy 207 pue YRUOCW eUO URYy sseT FO
spotzed Zuydweo z0y peysnfpe oq TTT pue sawueo Aep e Tesw 90714} 1OF YYUOW zed zeduEO
PITYO STQFITTS suo JO stseq oY} UO are UOTYNQTIYSTP JO Soqer SUT, ‘UoSsees SuTdweo
EL6T 9NR BupINp usIPTTYyo 10y sdweo sewuns 4TzJoOrd-uoU eTQTZTTe 03 UeTYNQTAYSTP zOF
STQUETFeAe OQ [TIM SpOoy BuTMOTTOJ oyy pezoedxe st 4y 4eyR eLTApe OF ST STUL
Teuuosieg PTetd iV
S}UsTdToOeYy dweg 1ewums TTY
Sdweg rewwng Butareg s,*y*qd-ans TIV *OL
uoseeg Sutdueg E16T - warpTTyo 103
Sdweg s8wumg 10J Set ZTpowwoD peyeuog so AYTTTQeTTeEAy tLoarans
€L6L *T youey
ON62-L92 (LTL) *9T9L
(S2TLT) *euveg *Binqstrs08H
T9EE XOG *O'd **4G 199810 TZzzZ
GOOd CALYNOT LNGWNZAOD 40 NVaUNA
SGITddNS 7% Aluzd0dd dO LiGWLUvaaG
VINVATASh#%. JO HLTVSMNONWOD
79
@ LIGIHXxg
tr jol
"pays 4atpioes Jurssaocoud sup yey wnwtuw c se
2Ptavad [INYS Siusud2I3e Guissacz0Ig “AIUITY 218I§ MY je [eacadde io Ino sossoXud sin Ag
O8N O} PAUSISUOII! 9q 10U few spoojs p>:cU0(] *peaosdde toy JaMjNIIAy jo wwuswyedsqd S9IeI§ Pritup
FW OF PeIWSUEN JUSNbeSqns YIM jeACIdde PU M2149) JOJ ADUDTY J1BIS SY O) Pri IwWaANs 9q IsNW
SIV IPOWWOD Pr3BUOP Zurss2od0d Joy SJUPWIIITG [LY “SItiprory Rurss2ooud Yons MIM SiuswIII7e
UI21IM OUI J9}3U2 0} PosiNbas oq jjeYs SO1DUSTe JUSITID92 PuB SaidurRe Burmnqiwisip-qns *guop s! sim
U24yUy “Weyl SuIy2ed-3) Aq 20 syonposd pur 3U229jj'P O1U! Way) Runs2AUOD Aq SO1IPOWWOD SS290I1d 01
SI1p1Dey POUOINIWYSUI so pMIDJEW'VOD AO}dWS ABW S21DUITe yUaidido1 pur *S2!2uIse BurNQiIsIp-qus 8
*AQuety 2301¢ Aq pouywe1ep se Aj1powwos oy JO enjea ap Aed 20 ‘puly Ul YOUNQINISIpP S31 Ul
Ayypounwos sip Sursejdas 0} yDalqns 9q [jeys ADUIBe 1U91d199) pues ose (jeYys AouSSe SuNnqiasip-qns
St JO JOARJ Ul WIR] Dd v “Sul;PUeY JO 9185 *aBeI01S 19d03d apraoid 0) JINj!8) S31 YBNomp Aripouwos
€@ 0} SBewWEP 10 JO SSO] S2sNe2 Jo AlIpowwPd Aue Sos JO S2INqiNsSIp Ajsadosdun AduSBe yusidi5e1 @ jy Lh
; *Sp2ou wesFoid jo S$o5x2 Ul OU Je S2dUBlEq puny EY suIUD}
“SP 02 “3IBIA [BISYy YDed DUO ISB] Ie INQ ‘AjjeDIpOIIed ADUaSY A181¢ Ayr Aq P2motAds 3q [JeYsS
Pems58 OS Spury jo SouTuIpUsdx? pue SIdI959y =~“ oAOQgE PoUl[INO SB OJ P9IUNOID¥ 9q OS]B []IM ‘939
“SONIPOWWOS JO SBeAL es ‘sSJOUITIUOS JO Z]e8 Btn WOI BuINID0u Spun. ‘wes8oid pooj peieuop op
JO Uone29do oup UT P[e Sasuodx2 sAleNSUIWpS J9yJO PUL SWIe|> ZBeWsEP 10 SBeweEpP ‘sasso] soOUTW
_ “uonevodsuel ‘eFes03s Aed 0) Aj 2]08 posn 9q |; eYys p22991]09 spury otp pue peprAoid sadiales 2)
O} VON] 32 Ul O[QuUOSED! Og []eYS Passosse SoBieyo SY] “2INIjNOUZY jo yUsUNIedIG S21e1§ poI!uf,
*93IAJ9g VONTZINN pue poo ‘9913jO JBUOTBoy ou Aq m21A91 03 :09fqns 9q pues Adus3Y 9281§ tp Jo
jeaoudde soud oy saey pjeys ADuc8e Sunnqisip-qns ow Aq po2iesodo Siuswssosse jo wa3shs Auy
“So1susse Zunnginsip-qns 3o Sunnqiuisip Aq possosse SaBseys Jo wa}shs @ YBnoMP VOIINQIISIP jo
3802 9381§ UTUIM OWN JO [1B 40 wed Aed 0} So1dUdTeE yUTId1993 o1INbas ABUl so1sUSBe BUTINQIISIP-qns °9
*WesZosd UOIINQIISIP 2y JO 1$0303U1
369Q Oy UT Oq 0} PauUIUD}EP Jy: ADUSZY 21815 B12 JO UONEZUOIINE 94) UOdN S219U9BB JUdIdID902 U20Mm)
+9q pousjsuen oq Aew sonrpoun0s ‘30Aamop] “ASUS Y 93895 217 Jo JeAOIJdde stip INOIIM Jo pesod
SIP OSImsI2INO 10 P9BuBYyIxS ‘pjos 9q 10U []eYSs (VOSS! AUB 10j) P2EN 10 P2INQIISIP 1oU SSIyIpOWWOD “¢
Ria -osnes Aus 0} onp
SSN IpoOwWSS jo AJ9A1]Op-UOU 30J JO S21I9A1;9p Ul SABIIP JO} 2/qQisUOdS21 aq JOU [jeYs AdUSBY 3181¢
OY ‘JZADMOP] “S2/NPOYSS Pozsonbes NM FdUBPI0II UT FONIPOWWIOD J9A1]9P 0) OPeWw 9q I{Im IWdUIdII8
AlQaAq *UISISY YWIOJ 108 SUOTIIPUOS PUB sWI9) }eI9U2T sin 0} UONIPpe Ul Aj}!poiuWOD sENoNJed B
© PSYydeIIe SI YdIYR UOIINQIISIP JO} VOTIJEUOP JO SUOMIPUOS puB SUZ} jeIDeds AUB PUB WON 9A}999I
OF 91918142 Spusidi992 30 So1dUsTe IUAIdI901 JO SOSSe]>D 10 Sse[d ay ‘S2tIpOURUOS OY BuIpIEsss $919
queSe Sunnginsip-qns Ajnou [jim ADuUsBY 21835 By) ‘UOIRUOP JO} 21QeIIeAB BWIODEQ SaIIIpoOwWWOD SY “Fy
“san Tpow
“WO2 JO 1019993 2 JO 9SNBI9qQ P22NPos O78 S2:nj!pusdxd Poo) jeUIOU asOYyM SIU2Id}991 JO SP1OUzBe
yuaidioo2 Aue Aq pordesce 0q 10U [jeYs S21IIPOWWOD ‘suNI{NDZy jo juouNIEdeq S9381¢ PoltUy
em Aq poyst]qeuis2® $2282 SIN P2299xe Oo} 10U ING So19UDBE JUSIdID91 Aq pezijiin Ajjny pus poinquisip
Ajqeimbe oq [[1m pus usd Se SoNUENd Yons Ul AJUO P91d995e pus P2isanbe2 oq [[1m S2NIpouwoy “€
bong *AQDUIBY D815 ay JO jeaosdde ey Ino|mMIn
epew oq [jeys ADuese 1wWeId1993 Aue Aq s9JsueN YONS ON “IUTIMING! JO AQudBe WUsId199) am Aq Airpou
+WOD YONS JO UOETZINN S—P 02 BuNPId! $182) 4O SUOTIeENSUOUISP 40) *sdoysy20M UI asN 10) 30 *ADUIBE
Bunss} 20 [wUIWIIadxa aptly BUG 01 ADUDSe yUsIdI9902 Dy) Aq Jo Aouade Sunnqinsip-qns ou) Aq
poaysuey oq Aww yustd1902 30 ADu0fe 1w91d1993 Aue Aq 26n 10) p2ieUOD Aj:powmos Aus jo Anuenb y °Z
“pepen Jo
PIOS 9q SOnIPowwos “Y'G"s*| [14 S22uUBISUMIIID OU JOpU “ALEBY SBIg OY) Jo [eAOIddE U013434
sod INNYIIM JO PssOdstp astmssyzd 9q 10U "jIm PUB {IU>AReL 1usIdI991 MI Aq P21S1SSB JO PPA128
SUOSIOA 2Soys JO 31)9U9qQ BY) 12j AjZ[US PISN 3q I[Im JUPWS=>-3B SIP J9PEcN POrtadaz Sanipowwoy *T
[SUOUIPUOD Pue Sud} BuImojjO, 2p O1 $207Be Aqoasey AduUsBY JUsIdIs0y Syl
*(j2uuo0ssed pred 20 yyers Suipry Put you) Ulase;p Surprise: sucsiad ya
UORNIMISUI B19NIIZeY> JyerUd (31yO2C-UOL YdUID¥9-xF} HeUIc-uOU ¥ 20 *S1IGQnd Paysoddns xe? jeusd-uou y C]
. "Apfep Wospyiys ~~
QuipJopun) punoss {esd so “und 2: cwnNs “152037 Due2 PLY? B Se Uns WeMols s:pas) Pytyud wjoId-voU *@
Bunesedo (jomyos Bead wesyQne & URYI JoyIG) L2UeTe SsIwALY 1dWIKA-*KR, B IL ‘atiqnd paoddns xe) y f
(Anud3 yy jv ada EL yoauDd) ist 4ouedy queidissy eu;
; “BIUrApASucag yo ippRes auowMay oy a ainypNsuUsy jo juswiiedsq
S215 pois) 2y) Aq PA:euop soNtpowviH? soy LONBIN4dde SryRU WGssoy ArQuaTY 1USIGID9Y Pr2weU-noOj2qQ ZY]
AWALANONOV 4O LNAWIUVd ad SAVES G4 LING SRL
AM GAI.YNUU SHLLIGQONIWOS 8." AQNHOY Sse Se
LNHId1D49u AHI ONY YINVAIASNNGd JO HINA YNONAQO HL NJAMLSA LNAINHHYOV
GT ONL aUNV ae nae saanere
o _# .
ous 72 008 BILAL ANIANE SACD 40 NVIENG
& Cale ens UNG +LebuGwa 40 LhINLH TAO
fever A ASNh Aad av tt Tv IMNONHNOD
80
a LIGIHXxXgd
rw t
“NAUMVIUAAUE YONS ye cece IP Bab ee od TA MR QpEg
am Ay Ppesinba. xe sysoda: yors stusurd of pur *fouady img oyr od SauoUaaut Hons UsISSR-as OF “y
so “1U9W29IBE Sty) JO SuOIStAOId Oy?) YIM
PIUTPIOIIV Ul {Sudd_y 331g Oy AQ P2UTISUOD Sa1ipOMWOD JO sauIOQUDAI BuIUIMWoI 11" aanqinsip op *e
¥ “saya AdDusBYy aIeI5
aM JO SuONSNUISUE ay InIm A]dWOD 0) S22770 AQUOTE yuoidi9as so ADUIBe SuNNgiSstp-qns ap “jusweeRe ay)
JO BOUNB]}22IUVSD 3O VOIeUIWIF2 10 2F3D1IOU YIns om Jrafgng *ADUDBe Juaid1992 20 AduaBe Sunnqgiisip-qns sw
AQ YIM P2tWOd Ajjny ud9q jou Arey JODY SUE PUL. PUe Sua) a: Ie—P P2uUapPIAS JO 1413932 uodn Aj a8
“TPeUly JUIWIO7T© Sip j2DueD Jew AUATY dams ayy “Awd JOyNO BIN 02 UNUM UI 2dNOU Shep (OE) AN
Supaid Aq yuow2e/3e Sip arrulwie: Kew ArUdRY a1e1g ay) JO ‘ADUSBe WUeIdI994 ‘Kouase Buinginsip-qns 2yul *91
“UIZi20 [LUOMIVU 4 JOTOD ‘2981 JO 2SNRD2qy SUOssed O1 yUDWAO;dW JO S2utpt9ej
— SSTAIOS Ul VONBUIWUISIP B51; Dead Ie) Sai UaTe O} alQRiIere Bpew 9qQ 10U [jm SP1IpoURWOd “*Y"G'’s'"
“WUSWIIIOJUS JO SUPSW J EIOIPNf s2yI0 JO S2yNIeIS [eIOPI4 Pue 9381 B[Qedt;dde spun UoNN>
“980i Surpnyjou! ‘Asessa22u pasapisuod ueys surow PIQeLVAB YSNoIyI UONIE J9LQINy Pye? OF IYBUU oI sAeYy
LBYS “Og 40 *SuNa[NI ZY Jo UsuNIVdeEq Sa)e15 P2IIUP) FYI 20 POO PsIeUOG IU2WUIZAONH Jo Neding stp JouIIy
*~*0029y JuBNSInd penss! SuOISNIISUI AU JO ‘;USPWI2ITe SIYI UI YII0J 39S Sesodind pue sjud}u! jeszus3
SP im Ajdwoo 02 sjrey ydtyn Aoussy 22u0Gg e 0} SPOOj] p2IBUOP SIMa[NIUSyY Jo jUeUIedSq S21e1§ Pou
JO Sjuswdrys saying Aja) BIpsww snunuOssIp oO} WYFIs BYyI SOAIZS22 POO POIBpod JUsWWIZACH jo nesing xy
.. SUONB]NI27 pue SMB] 2/QUdI|dde tpim 22uepI099" UI 9q ieys $96I Jo 19V
SIYSIY PAID Op Jo JA 2311 itm ddueldwos-uou JO} JUSWIIIFe SI Jo UOTNeUIWII) AUB ey) I1dooxq,,
*uls224
Spew SuoeUIs9Id33 DyI UO 2uUeI/22 UI JU2WI2zZe SII JO=pPUN PopUrixe Si Sdueisisse jersueury
lesaped “mel Aq pozuowmne suesw ayo Aue 20 je1dIpnf Kq 1uswW2DI0jUa Sit 4398 03 WB sy saey
TIEYS POOY P2IBU0T IUZSWUIZAOH JO NEDINg a1 JO S21eI¢ P211Uf Os ‘2oUeINSSe SIN YIM A[dWOD
©} [18} AQUISe JUsIdID01 PjnoUs “poog po}BUu0g TUSWIWIZAOH JO NeIINg 2Yy2 JO YGSN 2 Aq poepraoid
SoueIsisse Aue jO UOIssassod SuleI22 JO JapUNDI9Yy 22UeIS! SSB S9A1999i 21 SB Zuo] Se Dduesnsse sip
Aq p2e811Qo 9q 0) S2078e Adua3B UsIdID9y ‘saNIANDe pue suessOId yons jo wed & 29q 0) Adus3e
jusidide1 Aq prose pues poorssopum ae saidijod uoissiwpy “VOSN 2 Aq papiaoid St 2DueISISse
Yo1ym OF LousBe YUSId!1993 Jo AItA1De 40 WesZOId Aue JOpun UONSUIWIIISIP 0} I9efqns 9q 30 ‘jo
S1J2UIqQ BM Pstusp oq ‘ul UONBdidited wos papnjoxa 2q ‘uIZ1JO ;eUOTIeU 40 *JOJOD ‘258: jO puno
SYR UO “]TEYS SoIeIg Poituy 2p UI UOSIEd OU Jet 9A1192fgo ou MIM IU21STSUOD 2q 1[!4 Souel|dwo>
"IDV IeUP 93eNI99jj2 O12 FaNss! ‘s1UaWPUsWe yUENbasqns AUP Suipnjour “($1 weg YWAD L) suone
“NB2Y VASN ay) pue F461 J0 19H SIYBIy [AID oO: O17 JUENSINd JO Aq pesodun sjuawasinbes yye wnin
Ajdwosd siniry ey) ur pyeus PUB MIM SIt]dwod mou 31 IBY] Pooy p22eu0Gg 1U2WUIIZA0H Jo nesing 3121S
eiueajAsuusg ay) pue samapndUBy jo jU2WIedaG S$22z1¢ P2MNUy Syi Sainsse ASDuUSBe yusidi992 SUL “ST
———- - oe— -
*SYIUOW J9IUIM Beunp pe.lei UES ay Ol sucsied ‘ANAND2 Wes8oid Sump p2y9eILOD 9q 02 SUOSI2g
ceenaetieNteane- enn aluo Ayuno > seats ec tow ya Aiunod
° . . . * . — . . il .
= onc pumas tail LB ae CERO -SLESIO”® auoyd a] 21
“= S20¢ Vas y ee ee Capra uty
~ = s:er aurusdg ye) ee ee “S00e Xa
LS EERpEpag oon ns —ompagayecbog teney ss
a sayy. Waheed
ONIMO TION HILL TLATdNOO SAWMOONd TIE wo LUVLS GVH SdINVD UHWNYS BOs Al
' AUARIY JO rea |
(ta-€ *A ged tta-saced
AOS4 CAL INGYU LNANNEDA DO AO ANVaeNe
81
tiot
ad LIGIHXg
a |
se Sa=STi uns ~q Aoy
FNS L-usde 59 smeu ada ee
ft;
"CSIP ATSB Tez: Hae — 2253 8UB:S) |
ry . ri 9; . 2 A
meg ou op ONT A |
4
—— * cae —
CREO ~ SUE SIPs 171
ee. eee
~ war
Be 03:
Sy, a .
“s - —~* . ee sm ___ Fe Ko"g or ? es
4 we : Yad igo" Wi i5PF
Pe eri te 10 JN¥N
SUE Xo ~*~”
«Vg
(2ntL)
YOLOAUIA
OFAC BL—LTs “ON ucydayaz
STILT Ctueapdseuag ‘Bangstuepy
1PINIES sPMISIOY IIIT
POOR PAIPUOG JUswuUs2A00H jo AeQung
SANTA NS GNY ALHAdOYd 4O LNAWLYY aa ¥YINVATASNNGd
GaAAONdd Y
‘02-6 “ADe) Lhi-sU9Se
GOO4 ABLVNOA LNINMNIAOD sO Nr BUNe
82
ad LIGIHXxg
(89FIJO STyA 03 seftdoo [T® usmjzor - aqeot dp. uz eredezg )
oe: Se (©T3 TL) eng euStd pez tony
jt, AQGIINE AGN IOXFZ
*peitnber eq [TTA st uo Ol YoNs orfeu 09
eeige I putusp wteto yons uo pue ‘fouade SUTINQTAYSTP 97499 6Uy fq ¢ epeu Suteq
WECTS B OF PEST TTTH ATduo0s 07 duro an FO qued oyy uo emTpfes Aur 2euy Soe J
‘ *072104} Squeupuewe Lue pue semmpesozd pue
SuoTeTNsey 9323S/Tesepey Tre £q Sptqe 03 Suoyqgdsoxe qnouytTn ‘aez8e pue peer ‘paateo
“Ort Gary [T *eqemooe pue enr} st peystumy UOTPEUTOFUT ON} ZLYA AITAEO T *9
% a ‘AoueGy ayeztpur ( Sux) 3
ESOT (powering PRyBuop <cp Lsoue8y
_ Terepeg FO e2e4¢ sSsyZ0 Aue 03 Afdde 04 puszut nok op Ju Luispesea nok aay *2
_ (asi) /
Gorge Ty
FP2E HA
; ie aE ‘Neal
“Siojoedsut 24249 10/pue Te1epeg 03 *aqTs ey, 4e ‘uot 7 euLrosUT
queuTzzed ysTusmy pue sp.zodez paxrtmbez UTOLUTeEU OF eYTS dueo eyy Qe OTQeTyeae
©q TCT ouA suos.ed STQeespeTiiouy omy yo soueu ey AHOTSQ SJBOTpuy eseeTyY °9
} 4 L SNO SIOUID :Aep sec PaAtes sTeew Jo zequmu Teo - g
s:sasdueo uerptTtyo eTarstya Qo 2cuepuezze AT ep eFezeay ~- g
| A Se 9
,7 +See JO sequNYN - g
. | CL S9Z OL G9 WOU *potszed Zutdueg - y
“AqFaz {Oe Bupsorto ysod » Zutuedoead {OH - quedep » eatizse
_ ATTEFOTZFJO wempTTYS seqeq *(SETAGV ON) noTeq zo efe Tooyos ves
W2TH Jo £TUO NOILVINdOd NABTITHD uo peseq eq qsnu UoTzEMIOFUT suoTeredp dueg *¢
?89TAIES poog Fo suey.
oq e Aotdue dureg seog =. 5
“ehueauoy adTares
SITY
pue uexpTTUO ( ), 33TMPY ( ) Tuo uszprtTyg (X) +(su0 yoeYD)
VFFOd ( ) = FTF FOAG-uoN (MX) 2(euo yooyn) sdureg yo edky *¢
5 9 TH GS gr5" >
ATTA &um09 i) eae Rigeat (p09 eary) rox eucydetay
:660.=ppy
7
BRUT «2 | , Tut SIE KG ?Saesppy
/ 1-4 PA WT Aj aT vy) UBAA ITY Feo ae UIASB pg rosuods yo euey °}
WOSVaS GVO “PINS EL6t VOX Sdood GaLVNOd Bod GIVNNOLISANO
ON6e-LQL (LIL) °ON = TOL Seid cey ‘Bmqetssey
LO€E XCF "O%d-QeeNS sEQEI10g 1222
dood CELVNod INGNNWZAOD 4O Avan
SaITddOS % ALUTdOW JO INSHIYVEaO
VINVATZSNNSd 40 HITVEMNC “70
OR tae a:
Soh ONT
83
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
Tract 1500—Synod
[Filed Nov. 5, 1975]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v8.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN
MONROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
JUDGMENT ON VERDICT
AND NOW, to wit, this 5th day of November, 1975,
pursuant to the verdict of the jury returned on the 3rd
day of October, 1975, and the jury having answered
“no” to the Special Interrogatories filed on September
30, 1975, asking if the doctrine of substitute facilities
applies, and it appearing to the Court:
1. The public use, more particularly described in the
Complaint filed in the above-mentioned action, for which
Tract No. 1500 was taken and condemned by the United
States of America is one authorized by law and the said
tract of land and the taking thereof is necessary for said
public use.
2. This case is within the jurisdiction of the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsyl-
vania, which has the power and authority to enter judg-
ment.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DE-
CREED that judgment be entered in favor of:
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA SYNOD
OF LUTHERAN CAMPS OF AMERICA
and against the United States of America in the sum
of $250,000.00. The sum of $186,000.00 having been de-
84
posited into the Registry of the Court upon the filing
herein of the Declaration of Taking there remains to be
deposited into the Registry of the Court the sum of
$64,000.00, together with interest thereon at the rate
of six (6%) percent per annum from June 15, 1970,
until date of deposit.
All liens, claims, encumbrances, interests and demands
of every nature whatsoever existing at the time of tak-
ing are hereby transferred from the land to the fund
and any and all awards of just compensation that may
be made in this proceeding shall be payable and de-
ductible from the said fund.
It is further ORDERED AND DECREED that the
said sums, or any part thereof, shall be disbursed to the
defendants upon the entry of this judgment, the deposit
in the Registry of this Court of any deficiency, and the
presentation of a praecipe either from the persons to
whom payment is made, or their counsel, authorizing the
Clerk to satisfy this judgment in full.
Jurisdiction is reserved to make and enter such fur-
ther orders and decrees as may be necessary and proper.
/s/ Michael H. Sheridan
United States District Judge
Certified from the record
Date Nov. 5, 1975
Donald R. Berry
Clerk
For /s/ Richard M. Popovitch
Deputy Clerk
85
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
Tract 2122—Synod
[Filed Nov. 5, 1975]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v8.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN
MONROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
JUDGMENT ON VERDICT
AND NOW, to wit, this 5th day of November, 1975,
‘pursuant to the verdict of the jury returned on the 3rd
day of October, 1975, and the jury having answered “no”
to the Special Interrogatories filed on September 30,
1975, asking if the doctrine of substitute facilities ap-
plies, and it appearing to the Court:
1. The public use, more particularly described in the
Complaint filed in the above-mentioned action, for which
Tract No. 2122 was taken and condemned by the United
States of America is one authorized by law and the said
tract of land and the taking thereof is necessary for
said public use.
2. This case is within the jurisdiction of the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsyl-
vania, which has the power and authority to enter judg-
ment.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DE-
CREED that judgment be entered in favor of:
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA SYNOD
OF LUTHERAN CAMPS OF AMERICA
and against the United States of America in the sum
of $300,000.00. The sum of $210,000.00 having been de-
posited into the Registry of the Court upon the filing
herein of the Declaration of Taking there remains to be
deposited into the Kegistry of the Court the sum of
$90,000.00, together with interest thereon at the rate of
six (6%) percent per annum from June 15, 1970, until
date of deposit.
All liens, claims, encumbrances, interests and demands
of every nature whatsoever existing at the time of taking
are hereby transferred from the land to the fund and
any and all awards of just compensation that may be
made in this proceeding shall be payable and deductible
from the said fund.
It is further ORDERED AND DECREED that the
said sums, or any part thereof, shall be disbursed to the
defendants upon the entry of this judgment, the deposit
in the Registry of this Court of any deficiency, and the
presentation of a praecipe either from the persons to
whom payment is made, or their counsel, authorizing the
Clerk to satisfy this judgment in full.
Jurisdiction is reserved to make and enter such fur-
ther orders and decrees as may be necessary and proper.
/s/ Michael H. Sheridan
United States District Judge
Certified from the record
Date Nov. 5, 1975
Donald R. Berry
Clerk
For /s/ Richard M. Popovitch
Deputy Clerk
87
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil No. 70-240
Tract 2182—Synod
[Filed Nov. 5, 1975]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF
v8.
564.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SITUATE IN
MONROE AND PIKE COUNTIES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
JUDGMENT ON VERDICT
AND NOW, to wit, this 5th day of November, 1975,
pursuant to the verdict of the jury returned on the 3rd
day of October, 1975, and the jury having answered
“no” to the Special Interrogatories filed on September
80, 1975, asking if the doctrine of substitute facilities
applies, and it appearing to the Court:
1. The public use, more particularly described in the
Complaint filed in the above-mentioned action, for which
Tract No. 2132 was taken and condemned by the United.
States of America is one authorized by law and the said
tract of land and the taking thereof is necessary for said
public use.
2. This case is within the jurisdiction of the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Penn-
sylvania, which has the power and authority to enter
judgment.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DE-
CREED that judgment be entered in favor of:
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA SYNOD
OF LUTHERAN CAMPS OF AMERICA
and against the United States of America in the sum
of $190,000.00. The sum of $144,000.00 having been
ae. «4.
deposited into the Registry of the Court upon the filing
herein of the Declaration of Taking there remains to be
deposited into the Registry of the Court of the sum of
$46,000.00, together with interest thereon at the rate
of six (6%) percent per annum from June 15, 1970,
until date of deposit. |
All liens, claims, encumbrances, interests and demands
of every nature whatsoever existing at the time of tak-
ing are hereby transferred from the land to the fund
and any and all awards of just compensation that may
be made in this proceeding shall be payable and de-
ductible from the said fund.
It is further ORDERED AND DECREED that the
said sums, or any part thereof, shall be disbursed to the
defendants upon the entry of this judgment, the deposit
in the Registry of this Court of any deficiency, and the
presentation of a praecipe either from the persons to
whom payment is made, or their counsel, authorizing the
Clerk to satisfy this judgment in full.
Jurisdiction is reserved to make and enter such fur-
ther orders and decrees as may be necessary and proper.
/s/ Michael H. Sheridan
United States District Court
Certified from the record
Date Nov. 5, 1975
Donald R. Berry
Clerk
For /s/ Richard M. Popovitch
Deputy Clerk
89
PORTIONS OF TRIAL TRANSCRIPT
[23] two other matters at this time in Court. It won’t
take very long. So if you don’t mind returning to the
juryroom, we will send for you when we are finished.
(Whereupon, a recess was taken.)
(Whereupon, five Bear Creek Deeds were produced
and marked for identification as Synod’s Exhibit
Nos. 7, 7-A, 7-B, 7-C, 7-D, and 7-E, respectively.)
(Whereupon, a copy of minutes taken in 1962 was
produced and marked for identification as Synod’s
Exhibit No. 8.)
WILLIAM A. JANSON, JR., called as a witness, be-
ing duly sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. DITTMANN:
Dr. Janson, where do you reside?
A North Wales, Pennsylvania, right outside of Phila-
delphia.
Q And what is your profession?
A Iam aclergyman.
Q And how long have you been a clergyman?
A Thirty years.
Where, would you give us a little of your educa-
tional background, past service?
A Yes, sir.
[24] I am a native of York, Pennsylvania, and went
through the public school system there and went to
- Susquehanna University in Selingsgrove, Pennsylvania;
and to seminary in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.
And then, I served rural parishes in Virginia for a
while and I was an assistant pastor for a while in New
York City.
Then, I did some graduate work sandwiched in there
and got a degree from Columbia University in Educa-
tion, taught for a time in Ohio and then served two
90
parishes in Ohio and in 1961, I came to Philadelphia
as an Editor for our Board of Parish Education; spent
five years doing that and then took a parish in Lansdale,
Pennsylvania, and from there, I became the president
of the Synod.
7 Would you tell us what the function of the Synod
is
A Yes.
In our tradition, we try to group congregations to-
gether in @ geographical area. We call that grouping of
congregations a synod.
Now, Southeastern Pennsylvania, there are 182 Lu-
thern congregations in the five-county area; Bucks
County and Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Phila-
delphia County. And that is the Southeastern Pennsy]-
vania Synod, and my function in that is to seek to pro-
vide an opportunity for [25] these congregations to make
impact in providing programs and institutions, oppor-
tunities for us to act collectively, where an individual
congregation would have difficulty in acting.
Q How long have you held the office of president?
ry 3 pee been a since 1968.
ould you briefly describe the N
in terms of its area? x ee
A Yes, I believe the Northeastern Pennsylvania Synod
encompasses twelve counties; mainly from Allentown
Easton, Bethlehem, Reading, on the south, to the extreme
north, Pennsylvania border and as far east as the Dela-
ware and I am not sure where the western boundary
of that Synod is, but it encompasses about twelve
counties.
Q What is the function of the
Camp Corporation Lutheran Church
ell, about fifty-some years ago, some
oe in the Lutheran shart Salt that Pag Boy
previde a unique opportunity for youn ‘
decided that this would pom’ cheat a Mesiged do x4
variety of things.
First of all, I think that it would help them, a young
person grow in his love of God and Country as he would
spend some time in the out-of-doors. He would have a
91
good opportunity of learning about nature and would
have a good opportunity to appreciate the land in which
he lives, like going to bed when the crickets are chirpping
and studying the [26] trees and the flowers and that
kind of thing. So the Camp Corporation, in our tradi-
tion, has been one that has carried a very important
part of the program for growing boys and girls.
I think that the Camp Corporation also is very im-
portant because we have an opportunity for our young
people to mix, from various sections of these two Synods.
Boys and girls from the city relate to boys and girls
from the country. Small-town children relate to others
whom they meet and sometimes they form very lasting
friendships. And they learn something about the way
they relate to other boys and girls.
The Camp Corporation also is quite concerned about
the fact that children from the ghetto area and boys
and girls from the rural areas have a chance to mix
and become known.
We also like to feel that we are working with children
who have learning disabilities and some who have dif-
ficulty in their homelife. So this is a kind of mix that
the Camp Corporation attempts to administer so in that
sense, it plans its programs and conducts its activities;
so, it is really then a system of providing an educational,
religious, charitable experience for boys and girls of
Northeastern Pennsylvania.
What are the names of the camps that were owned
by [27] the Synod prior to the date of taking?
A Camp Miller, Camp Hagan and Camp Minister-
ium.
Q And where were those camps located?
A Along the Delaware, Shawnee on the Delaware
area.
Has the Northeastern Synod participated in the
funding of the camp program.
A Yes, sir, both synods have.
I think the jury might appreciate the fact that prior
to 1968, the Northeastern Pennsylvania Synod and the
Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod were one, called the
Eastern Pennsylvania Synod, and so prior to 1968, ob-
—————
92
viously, the Eastern Pennsylvania Synod supported the
camping program.
When we divided ourselves into two synods, then this
became a function of both synods. So since 1968, both
synods have supported the camping program. We do this
collectively because it is economically feasible. It makes
sense to do it together.
Q What have been the financial results of the opera-
tion of the camping program, by the church?
A Well, yes, we have always had to subsidize it. It
has never been a profit-making enterprise since I be-
came president in 1968. The amount of money that both
have put into the camps has risen from $13,000 to ap-
proximately $30,000 this past camp season.
Q Would you identify the Lutheran camps, the Camp
* & * aa
[31] MR. DITTMANN: Well, I assume it will be
possible to have them brought down here although, well,
work out something else, access to them.
(Whereupon, the discussion at side bar was con-
cluded. )
BY MR. DITTMANN:
Q I show you an exhibit marked Synod’s Exhibit
No. 8 and ask you what that is, Doctor.
A This is a copy of the minutes that were taken, in
1962, authorizing the appointment of a committee to
study the selection of campsites.
Q Is that a true and correct excerpt from the minutes
of that meeting?
A Yes, sir.
Q a you please read to the jury the excerpt?
es.
“The president explained that because the dam will be
built at Tocks Island in the Delaware River above Shaw-
nee, the three summer camps will be flooded and new
sites will have to be obtained. ae his recommendation,
it was resolved:
93
A. That the president be authorized in consultation
with the Board of Christian Education to appoint a
committee on the selection of camp sites.
B. That the committee be composed of three repre-
sentatives of the Board of Christian Education and two
[32] representatives of the Executive Board.
C. That the committee be authorized to consult with
the Financial Committee of this Board in the prepara-
tion of a plan to finance the purchase of the campsites.
D. That the committee subject to concurring action
by the Financial Committee and the approval of the
Synod’s legal counsellor be authorized to take the neces-
sary steps to protect its interest in any specified prop-
erty, pending formal action by this Board and;
E. That the Board of Christian Education be au-
thorized to spend up to $10,000 of its funds in develop-
ing surveys and plot plans to guide the committee in its
choice of sites.”
Q Now, Dr. Janson, do you know whether or not a
campsite was subsequently selected and acquired by the
Synod?
Yes, I do.
And do you know when that occurred?
Somewhere in the year 1963, 1964.
And do you know the location of the campsite?
We refer to it as Bear Creek Camp Site.
And where is Bear Creek?
Well, it is off around 115, just one exit beyond
the Scranton interchange, off the Northeast Extension.
Q Do you know how many acres comprise the Bear
Creek site?
[33] A Well, when we bought it, we thought we were
acquiring 3500 acres and then it was necessary to survey
PO PO > Pp
_ the area that we bought and we picked up 300 acres.
So we now have 3800 instead of 3500.
Q Do you know the total cost of the Bear Creek
site?
A Yes, I think it was approximately $321,000.
THE COURT: Synod’s Exhibit No. 7 to 7-E, are
admitted in evidence.
94
BY MR. DITTMANN:
Q And those, Dr. Janson, are copies of the deeds
conveying the Bear Creek site to the Synod, are they
not, sir?
A Yes.
Q And by that, I am referring to Exhibits No. 7 to
7-E.
A Right.
Q Now, Dr. Janson, do you know the date when the
three Delaware River camps of the Synod were con-
demned by the United States?
A I believe that was 1970, that the formal condemna-
tion took place.
Q Would you tell us why the Synod has not proceeded
to construct new, to develop a complete new campsite, at
the Bear Creek location?
A Yes, I think this long time has become a reality
probably for two factors.
I think, first of all, we were hoping that the * * *
& * * t
[39] hereafter referred to as the Church. The corpora-
tion shall be in adherence to such Church or its lawful
successor and amenable to its laws.”
Q Now, in that connection, would it be fair to say
that in promulgating the camping situation, the Camp
Committees would be trying to adhere to that purpose,
under that corporation?
A Yes.
Q May I have them back; they are basically the same.
That is the later amendment, is it not?
THE COURT: What is the number, Doctor?
A 33-A is on the yellow tag.
This is entitled, “Articles of Amendment of the East-
ern Pennsylvania Synod of the Lutheran Church in
America.”
Q Now, that is changing the name again, is it not;
in 1969, I believe?
A Yes.
95
Q The date on that is 1969, is it, sir?
A The date of that is 1969.
Q And underneath that paragraph, changing the
name, there is another paragraph again setting forth the
purposes of the organization.
A Yes.
Q And would you read that paragraph?
A Yes, it is starting with the four again.
[40] “The purpose of the corporation is to promote the
Christian religion according to the tenets of faith as set
forth in the laws of the Lutheran Church of America,
hereinafter referred to as the Church. The corporation
shall be in adherence to such Church or its lawful suc-
cessors and amenable to its laws.” Number five, “Cor-
poration shall not contemplate pecuniary gain or profit
incidental or otherwise to its members.” And six, “The
corporation shall have perpetual existence.’”’ Seven, “The
corporation is organized on a non-stock basis.”
Q Now, to your knowledge, there has been no other
changes in the name?
A That is correct.
Q And that would still be in effect today?
A Yes.
Q And would have been in effect in June, 1970?
A Yes.
Q Just while we are on that for a second, that para-
graph dealing with, it does not contemplate pecuniary
gain or profit, that is to qualify it under a religious
corporation, is it not?
A That is my understanding.
Q In other words, if you made profit, you would have
to start paying taxes?
A Iam afraid that is the case, yes.
[41] Q Okay, may I have it back.
Would it be fair to say, in your opinion, that in con-
ducting the camps, say for the period from 1962 up to
1970, that the camps did act in a way to promote the
tenets and the teachings of the Lutheran Church of
America?
A I believe so.
96
Q In other words, do you know for a fact that the
children, up until 1970, anyway, the majority of the
yg that attended the camps were of the Lutheran
ait
A I believe I would like to ask the Executive Sec-
retary to document that. I don’t believe the term ma-
jority is quite accurate. There is always a shifting from
year to year. Sometimes it is fifty/fifty. Sometimes it
- be 55/45. The term, majority, throws me a little
it. |
Q Well, there was an affidavit submitted in this pro-
ceeding by the Reverend Gulliford, that you mentioned,
which is on file with the Court and I believe he states
that under paragraph seven on page five, that in 1965,
the percentage of Lutheran children attending the camps
was 59 percent and non-Lutherans were 41 percent.
Then, in 1966, it was 60 percent for the Lutheran,
of Lutheran children, children of the Lutheran faith and
49 percent for non-Lutheran children.
A Right.
Q That in 1967—
[53] REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. DITTMANN:
Q Dr. Janson, do you, is the camp operation by the
Synod as previously described by you, consistent with the
purpose of the Synod as stated in the charter documents
that were shown to you earlier?
A It would be my conviction, yes.
Q And would you explain why you think the two are
consistent?
A Yes, well, I think the reason they are consistent
is because of the philosophy of camping that has evolved
and emerged. It is a very personal style of camping
which there is a very close relationship between the
counsellors and the campers. There is an effort to, you
know, communicate about the world and about creation,
about the presence of God. There is an effort to talk
97
about Christian values and as they relate to life. So, you
know, with that kind of programming, I would say it is
consistent when it talks about the articles of incorpora-
tion, about the tenets of the Lutheran confession.
Q Dr. Janson, do you have any idea of the amount
of money that has been invested in the Bear Creek site,
to date, in improvements?
MR. RUVOLO: Objection, Your Honor.
THE COURT: No, I think in view of the cross ex-
amination, that is relevant; overruled.
* * * ad
(57) A I was at the United Church of Christ Con-
ference Center, but no full-blown denominational church
camp..
Q How about non-denominational camps or private
camps, sir?
A No.
Q You have had no occasion to visit them?
A No.
MR. RUVOLO: No further questions.
THE COURT: Next witness.
ROY GULLIFORD, called as a witness, being duly
sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. DITTMANN:
Q Where do you live, Pastor Sulliford?
A I live in Berks County, suburban Reading, Penn-
sylvania.
Q And how long have you resided in that area?
A Since 1964.
Q And what is your educational background?
A Iam a product of the schools of the City of Phila-
delphia, attended Gettysburg College in Gettysburg, Penn-
sylvania. Then, went on to the Lutheran Theological
Seminary at Philadelphia where I received my Bachelor
of Divinity and was ordained as a minister of the Lu-
theran Church of America.
98
Q And when was that?
[58] A 1959.
Q And what has your career been since 1959?
A I served briefly as an assistant pastor in Phila-
delphia. In 1960, assumed for the first time my own
parish in Chester County, a town called Lionville. I was
there for four years, took six months off to get an ad-
ditional decree and then se:ved as pastor of Reforma-
tion Lutheran Church, Refton, suburban Reading, until
1970, when I was called by the Synod to serve as Ex-
ecutive Director of the Lutheran Camp Corporation.
Q And you are today the Executive Director of the
Camp Corporation?
A Yes, I am.
Q What are your duties and responsibilities as Ex-
ecutive Director of the Camp Corporation?
A I am responsible for the working in conjunction
with the Board in selection of the personnel, directors,
staff, responsible for the oversight of the programs, the
care of the facilities and of course, to the best of a
clergyman’s ability, the fiscal concerns of the corporation.
Q Would you tell us again to whom you report?
I am responsible to the Camp Corporation Board.
Q And that Board is made up of what?
A Laymen and pastors, chosen by the Synod to over-
see the camping operations. I am their employee.
[59] Q And when did you assume that office?
A March 1, 1970.
Q Do you know the date when the United States con-
demned the three camps that we have referred to before?
A We were informed of the condemnation in August
of 1970. At that time I was told that was backdated
to June 1 of 1970.
THE COURT: Maybe we can get that in by stipula-
tion; can’t we? What is the agreed date?
MR. DITTMANN: Of taking, Your Honor, June 15.
June 15 was the date it was taken.
99
BY MR. DITTMANN:
i Executive
What other, since you were named as
pissihar have you had any other camping experiences
ivities?
ay I was part of a, what was called the yee
Pennsylvania Task Force. This was an ecumenical study
of fifteen camp sites owned by Protestant churches in
Eastern Pennsylvania. It was an attempt to study their
sites, their programs, their philosophies, to see ae
things could be done jointly and to develop an overa
plan for the ’70’s, in which we could more cooperatively
work and thus have more impact and accomplish more.
that steering committee.
Tah also invited by a sister Lutheran body, the
American Lutheran Church, to be one of three ae
studied the [60] same sort of thing for the Pittsburg
camps of the ALC, Camp Agape. I am presently serving
on the Convention Committee of the American Camping
Association, Chairman of the In Depth Seminar Com-
mittee for the National Convention which will be held in
Philadelphia this March. I am responsible for determin-
ing what the content of the seminars will be and in sr
junction with the committee, chosing the people who wi
seminars. si ;
“— ME ponds Director, were you familiar with the
operation of Camp Miller, Hagan and Ministerium in
ats I was serving as Executive Director at that time
i f Camp Ministerium.
anR RUVOLO: i cine me, I didn‘t hear the last
ae Also, Director of Camp Ministerium, the middle
camp.
BY MR. DITTMANN:
I would like you to describe in detail to the jury,
P| of all; tell us about Camp Miller, where was it
ig Miller was about three miles north of the
Shawnee on the Delaware. It was, I believe, 140 acres,
100
55 buildings, handled, could handle up to 260 campers
with a staff of 68. Half of the site was river bottomed
right along the river. The balance of it was going on up
the mountain. Could I show that?
[61] Q Yes.
I show you a large photograph which I am going to
have marked for identification in just a minute and ask
you whether this shows Camp Miller?
A Upside down, but it is Camp Miller.
Q Now, what do you mean by upside down?
A They reversed the photograph. It is Camp Miller,
but it is, I guess when they put it on the poster board,
they twisted it somehow. Somehow, it gets everything
backwards.
(Whereupon, a photograph of Camp Miller was pro-
duced and marked for identification as Synod’s Ex-
hibit No. 1.)
BY MR. DITTMANN:
Q This has been marked Synod No. 1. Now, Synod
No. 1, that is a picture of Camp Miller, you say it is
upside down?
A Yes.
Q And this is an inversion, I guess, that has been
created by the photographer?
A In making the poster, yes.
Q How does that affect the picture?
A Well, the river is still on the east and the moun-
tains are still on the west, but the north end of the camp
is on the south and the south end of the camp is on the
north. I don’t know whether you want to pursue that
or not.
Q_ In other words, if you were approaching the camp
[62] from the river, you would by airplane as this pic-
ture does, you will actually see the buildings up here to
= ae side and the open area would be to the left
side
A Yes.
101
Q Do we have a smaller picture that has been done
correctly?
A A little eight by ten is in the library.
Q Ina minute, we will get that.
Now, supposing I hand you Synod No. 1 and then I
am going to ask you a little bit more. About how many
buildings did you say comprised it?
A Fifty-five buildings on the Miller site.
Q What kind of buildings were they?
A They were a variety of buildings, of course, that
you would need for a camp. Originally, Miller was a
farm and we had the farm house and barn and we were
able to keep some of the area in farming so that some
of the campers could see what farming is all about.
Many of our campers are from Philadelphia and one boy
asked how you could tell a bull from a cow. He didn’t
know which were male and female, so it was helpful
to see a bit of a farm that campers could see things
firsthand. There were tennis courts, of course, large
playing fields, atheltics were always a large part of the
program.
A large dining hall facility, that could comfortably
accommodate 300. There was an infirmary, an arts and
crafts [63] building, fully equipped.
These actually are on the south. They were some of
the original cabins built back in the 1920’s. All of these
cabins were built in 1965. They were all replacement
cabins. This whole string, I believe of fifteen cabins,
so that when we say that the camp was established in
1927, the buildings, of course, continues as you grow
and expand, you deveiop your facilities. A major por-
tion of the program was here on the mountain where we
could have all kinds of nature—
Q And by the mountain, you are referring to that
~ wooded area shown on the l
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.