Law Commons^™

Pooling For Horizontal Wells: Can They Teach An Old Dog New Tricks?, Bruce M. Kramer

Shale Plays in the Intermountain West: Legal and Policy Issues (November 12)

74 pages.

This paper was originally published as:

Bruce M. Kramer, “Pooling for Horizontal Wells: Can They Teach an Old Dog New Tricks?,” 55 Rocky Mt. Min. L. Inst. 8-1, § 8.05 (2009).

State Fish Stocking Programs At Risk: Takings Under The Endangered Species Act, Amy L. Stein

UF Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this article provides a brief background to fish stocking practices in the United States, including a discussion of beneficial fish stocking practices, as well as some of the allegations surrounding the detrimental effects. Part II of this article provides some necessary background on section 9 of the ESA, the “actual injury” prong, the “significant impairment” prong, and their application to fish stocking. Part III of this article sets forth recommendations for future clarification and increased consistency on these issues. Specifically, this article supports the use of two rules that can help reconcile the uncertain landscape surrounding a …

Rising Seas And Common Law Baselines: A Comment On Regulatory Takings Discourse Concerning Climate Change, J. Peter Byrne

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In several recent cases considering claims that regulatory measures addressing rising sea levels violate the Takings Clause, courts have given significant normative weight to traditional common law rules, even when such rules have long been superseded by statutory provisions. This essay argues that giving analytic precedence to such common law baselines lacks justification and can pose serious obstacles to reasonable measures to adapt to climate change.

Should Lucas V. South Carolina Coastal Council Protect Where The Wild Things Are? Of Beavers, Bob-O-Links, And Other Things That Go Bump In The Night, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council is one of several recent Supreme Court decisions in which the Court used the Just Compensation Clause as a "weapon of reaction" to strike down an offending land use restriction. In Lucas, the target of the Court's animus was a state law prohibiting a landowner from developing two beachfront lots. The South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the law as a legitimate exercise of the State's police power to protect the public from harm in the face of a takings challenge by the landowner. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the South Carolina court's talismatic …

Has The U.S. Supreme Court Finally Drained The Swamp Of Takings Jurisprudence? The Impact Of Lucas V. South Carolina Coastal Council On Wetlands And Coastal Barrier Beaches, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article argues that the Court's reliance on the law of property neither creates an internal inconsistency in takings law nor necessarily leads to further destruction of natural resources. Background principles of property law, such as custom and public trust, have long provided a basis for government protection of the public's interest in certain types of land, like the barrier beach David Lucas sought to develop.

Thus, the Lucas case need not be perceived as casting a constitutional cloud over laws protecting important ecosystems like wetlands and barrier beaches. The decision may not place these resources in greater danger from …

Regulatory Takings And Wetland Protection In The Post-Lucas Era, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In June 1992, the United States Supreme Court decided Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council. The case involved a claim for compensation against the State of South Carolina by a landowner who was prohibited from placing structures on two of his beachfront lots. The Court declared that the landowners must be compensated when government regulations deprive them of all economically beneficial or productive uses of their property unless the proscribed uses were not permitted as part of their original titles.

Although some legal commentators have praised the Lucas decision, others have strongly condemned it. A common criticism of Lucas …