Digital Commons Network^™

The Compensation Constraint And The Scope Of The Takings Clause, Thomas W. Merrill

Notre Dame Law Review

The idea I wish to explore in this Essay is whether the established methods for determining just compensation can shed light on the meaning of other issues that arise in litigation under the Takings Clause. Specifically, is it possible to “reverse engineer” the Takings Clause by reasoning from settled understandings about how to determine just compensation in order to reach certain conclusions about when the Clause applies, what interests in private property are covered by the Clause, and what does it mean to take such property? The proposed exercise is positive or descriptive in nature rather than normative. The hypothesis …

Justifying A Prudential Solution To The Williamson County Ripeness Puzzle, Katherine Mims Crocker

Katherine Mims Crocker

No abstract provided.

Avoiding Takings “Accidents”: A Torts Perspective On Takings Law, Eric Kades

Eric A. Kades

Viewing the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment as a form of insurance appeals to our intuition. The government, like fire, does not often "take" property, but when faced with extraordinary risk property owners naturally desire compensation. Recent scholarship, however, has dissolved the attractiveness of this perspective. This literature, through economic analysis, claims that the Takings Clause should be repealed and replaced with private takings insurance. This is the "no-compensation" result. This article argues that the insurance-based understanding of the just compensation requirement can be preserved without reaching the surprising no-compensation result. The intuitive appeal of understanding the Takings Clause …

This Land Is Your Land? Survey Delegation Laws As A Compensable Taking, Doug Chapman

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

While every state in the Union has a statute delegating in some form surveying authority to private entities, the practice has been especially visible and controversial due to pipeline construction in the Commonwealth of Virginia. A major point of contention in pipeline development has centered upon the ability of private companies to use delegated eminent domain powers to survey land for possible future development. While recent decisions by both a federal Virginia District Court and the state’s Supreme Court have upheld the state’s surveying delegation law from landowner challenges, the issue is far from resolved. Virginia therefore provides an ideal …

A Critical Reexamination Of The Takings Jurisprudence, Glynn S. Lunney Jr

Glynn Lunney

To provide some insight into the nature of these disagreements, and to suggest a possible solution to the compensation issue, this article undertakes a critical reexamination of the takings jurisprudence. It focuses on the two bases which the modem Court has articulated as support for its resolution of the compensation issue: (1) the articulated purpose of using the just compensation requirement "to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens"; and (2) the early case law. Beginning with the Court's first struggles with the compensation issue in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, this article traces …

California Department Of Toxic Substances Control V. Westside Delivery, Llc, Mitch L. Werbell V

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in California Department of Toxic Substances Control v. Westside Delivery, LLC reminds prospective purchasers of tax-defaulted property of their responsibility for due diligence.The case addressed the reach of the third-party defense to a CERCLA cost recovery action. The court determined that CERCLA’s third-party defense did not apply to a company which purchased a contaminated property at a tax auction because of its “contractual relationship” with the former owner-polluter and because the relevant contaminating acts occurred “in connection with” the prior polluter’s ownership of the site.

Massachusetts Has A Problem: The Unconstitutionality Of The Tax Deed, Ralph D. Clifford

University of Massachusetts Law Review

The predominant method for collecting delinquent real estate taxes in Massachusetts is the use of the “tax deed” as authorized by Chapter 60, Sections 53-54. Under the authorized procedures, each municipality’s tax collector can execute and record a deed that transfers fee simple title to the real estate to the municipality subject to the taxpayer’s statutorily created redemption right. If the redemption right is or cannot be exercised, all of the taxpayer’s rights in the property, as well as other’s rights created by encumbrances such as mortgages, are terminated by the foreclosure process provided for in the statute. Importantly, the …

Compensation For Coal Seam Gas Occupation: Assessing The Harms, Michael Fibbens, Michael Y. Mak, Anthony Williams

Anthony Williams

Coal seam gas (CSG) extraction is expanding in eastern Australia. However, while the body of knowledge relating to compensation for partial taking is well established, the theory concerning the valuation of landholder compensation for occupation by CSG infrastructure is in an embryonic stage. In order to further the development of theory in this important area, this research investigates the harms that are inflicted upon landholders and their property by CSG occupation. As indicated in the Queensland mining case of Peabody West Burton Pty Ltd & Ors v Mason & Ors [2012] QLC 23, the assessment of compensation begins by enquiring …

Assessing Compensation For Landholders Affected By Coal Seam Gas Occupation, Michael Fibbens, Michael Y. Mak, Anthony Williams

Anthony Williams

Valuation theory in Australia has long established principles relating to compensation for the acquisition of part of property. However, the theory relating to assessing compensation for coal seam gas (CSG) occupation is relatively undeveloped and CSG activity in New South Wales (NSW) takes place in an environment where some confusion surrounds the subject of the assessment of landholder compensation. This paper applies a comparative study of the compensation assessment practices of courts in NSW, Queensland and Alberta. The research, reported in this paper, documents a trail of judicial decisions supporting the use of “piecemeal” and “before and after” approaches where …

Fact Sheet: Comparison Of Land Rights And Native Title In Nsw, New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council

Indigenous Water Justice Symposium (June 6)

Presenter: Phil Duncan, Gomeroi Nation, New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council

3 pages

Contains footnotes

"Land Rights and Native Title in NSW"

"October 2012"

"This document has been prepared by the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council (NSWALC) for Local Aboriginal Land Councils (LALCs) and Aboriginal communities in NSW. NSWALC acknowledges the assistance of NTSCORP Limited (NTSCORP) in the development of this Fact Sheet."--Last page

Slides: The Nsw Aboriginal Land Council (Nswalc) And Aboriginal Land Rights In Nsw, New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council

Indigenous Water Justice Symposium (June 6)

Presenter: Phil Duncan, Gomeroi Nation, New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council

19 slides

Valuing Control, Peter Dicola

Michigan Law Review

Control over property is valuable in and of itself. Scholars have not fully recognized or explored that straightforward premise, which has profound implications for the economic analysis of property rights. A party to a property dispute may actually prefer liability-rule protection for an entitlement resting with the other party to liability-rule protection for an entitlement resting with her. This Article presents a novel economic model that determines the conditions under which that is the case—by taking account of how parties value control. The model suggests new opportunities for policymakers to resolve conflicts and to develop better information about property disputes …

Emergency Takings, Brian Angelo Lee

Michigan Law Review

Takings law has long contained a puzzle. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires the government to pay “just compensation” to owners of private property that the government “takes.” In ordinary circumstances, this requirement applies equally whether the property is confiscated or destroyed, and it also applies to property confiscated in emergencies. Remarkably, however, courts have repeatedly held that if the government destroys property to address an emergency, then a “necessity exception” relieves the government of any obligation to compensate the owner of the property that was sacrificed for the public good. Although the roots of this startling principle …

Passive Takings: The State's Affirmative Duty To Protect Property, Christopher Serkin

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause is to protect property owners from the most significant costs of legal transitions. Paradigmatically, a regulatory taking involves a government action that interferes with expectations about the content of property rights. Legal change has therefore always been central to regulatory takings claims. This Article argues that it does not need to be and that governments can violate the Takings Clause by failing to act in the face of a changing world. This argument represents much more than a minor refinement of takings law because recognizing governmental liability for failing to act means …

Supreme Court, New York County, Uhlfelder V. Weinshall, David Schoenhaar

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, Consumers Union Of United States, Inc. V. New York, Daphne Vlcek

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justifying A Prudential Solution To The Williamson County Ripeness Puzzle, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Ripeness Game: Why Are We Still Forced To Play?, Michael M. Berger

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Neglected Political Economy Of Eminent Domain, Nicole Stelle Garnett

Nicole Stelle Garnett

This Article challenges a foundational assumption about eminent domain - namely, that owners are systematically undercompensated because they receive only fair market value for their property. The Article shows that, in fact, scholars have overstated the undercompensation problem because they have focused on the compensation required by the Constitution, rather than on the actual mechanics of eminent domain. The Article examines three ways that Takers (i.e., non-judicial actors in the eminent domain process) minimize undercompensation. First, Takers may avoid taking high-subjective-value properties. Second, Takers frequently must pay more compensation in the form of relocation assistance. Third, Takers and property owners …

Irresponsible Legislating: Reeling In The Aftermath Of Kelo, Patricia E. Salkin

Patricia E. Salkin

No abstract provided.

Taking The Wind Out Of The Government's Sails?: Forfeitures And Just Compensation, J. Kelly Strader

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Eminent Domain Legislation Post-Kelo: A State Of The States, Patricia E. Salkin

Patricia E. Salkin

In Kelo v. City of New London, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the use of eminent domain for economic development is a permissible“public use” under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The decision proved controversial, as many feared that it would benefit large corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities. Shortly thereafter, numerous states introduced legislation limiting the use of eminent domain.This article surveys those state initiatives that have been signed into law following the Court’s decision in Kelo.

Singapore Law Watch - Govt Has An Override In Land Ownership (Forum), Linus Koh

Linus Koh

No abstract provided.

The Growing Influence Of Tort And Property Law On Natural Resources Law: Case Studies Of Coal Bed Methane Development And Geologic Carbon Sequestration, Alexandra B. Klass

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

19 pages.

"Alexandra B. Klass, Associate Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School"

Taking Compensation Private, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky

All Faculty Scholarship

In light of the expansive interpretation of the ""public use"" requirement, the payment of ""just compensation"" remains the only meaningful limit on the government's eminent domain power and, correspondingly, the only safeguard of private property owners' rights against abusive takings. Yet, the current compensation regime is suboptimal. While both efficiency and fairness require paying full compensation for seizures by eminent domain, current law limits the compensation to market value. Despite the virtual consensus about the inadequacy of market compensation, courts adhere to it for a purely practical reason: there is no way to measure the true subjective value of property …

Compensation For Porperty Under The European Convention On Human Rights, Tom Allen

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Article asks whether the right to property, as a human right, serves the same general purpose as other human rights. The Article does so by examining the standards relating to compensation for deprivations of property under the European human rights system. If the system protects property for similar reasons as other fundamental rights, the interpretation of the right to property should draw upon the principles developed in relation to the interpretation of other rights. However, if the right to property is distinct from other human rights, then perhaps guidance on its interpretation should come from comparative law, specifically in …

Eminent Domain Legislation Post-Kelo: A State Of The States, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

In Kelo v. City of New London, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the use of eminent domain for economic development is a permissible“public use” under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The decision proved controversial, as many feared that it would benefit large corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities. Shortly thereafter, numerous states introduced legislation limiting the use of eminent domain.This article surveys those state initiatives that have been signed into law following the Court’s decision in Kelo.

Restoring Property Rights In Washington: Regulatory Takings Compensation Inspired By Oregon's Measure 37, Kelly Michelle Kelley

Seattle University Law Review

Part II of this Comment provides a background of regulatory takings jurisprudence, outlining both the U.S. Supreme Court's and Washington courts' respective analyses of regulatory takings challenges under the takings clauses of both the U.S. and Washington Constitutions. Part III discusses the threshold compensation statutes that have been enacted by four states in an effort to remedy the problem of regulatory takings. Part IV examines Oregon's Measure 37 and the lawsuit that validated its constitutionality. Part V analyzes Washington's proposed property rights measure, Initiative 933, and argues that Washington needs a regulatory takings compensation statute. Finally, Part VI concludes that …

The Neglected Political Economy Of Eminent Domain, Nicole Stelle Garnett

Journal Articles

This Article challenges a foundational assumption about eminent domain - namely, that owners are systematically undercompensated because they receive only fair market value for their property. The Article shows that, in fact, scholars have overstated the undercompensation problem because they have focused on the compensation required by the Constitution, rather than on the actual mechanics of eminent domain. The Article examines three ways that Takers (i.e., non-judicial actors in the eminent domain process) minimize undercompensation. First, Takers may avoid taking high-subjective-value properties. Second, Takers frequently must pay more compensation in the form of relocation assistance. Third, Takers and property owners …

Bargaining For Takings Compensation, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky

All Faculty Scholarship

Efficiency and fairness require paying full compensation to property owners when their property is taken by eminent domain. Yet, to date, the evidentiary challenge of proving subjective value has proved insurmountable, and current law requires condemnees to settle for fair market value. This Article proposes a self-assessment mechanism that can make full compensation at subjective value practical. Under our proposal, property owners must be given the opportunity to state the value of the property designated for condemnation. Once property owners name their price, the government can take the property only at that price. However, if the government chooses not to …