The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Bedford Associates, 618 F.2d 904 (2nd Cir. 1980):
The government's attempts to distinguish Lacy are unpersuasive. We are told that in Lacy, unlike the present case, the owner's use of his land was not inconsistent with the government's use, and that the owner therefore was not seeking to oust the government from the land. 33 United States v. Wood, supra, purported to find such a distinction, but the issue in Wood was the propriety of granting the government an unconditional injunction; the district court's power to condition the injunction was apparently assumed. 34 466 F.2d at 1389.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.