Law Commons^™

Privatizing Eminent Domain: The Delegation Of A Very Public Power To Private, Non-Profit And Charitable Corporations , Asmara Tekle Johnson

American University Law Review

In an age of privatization of many governmental functions such as health care, prison management, and warfare, this Article poses the question as to whether eminent domain should be among them. Unlike other privatized functions, eminent domain is a traditionally governmental and highly coercive power, akin to the government’s power to tax, to arrest individuals, and to license. It is, therefore, a very public power.

In particular, the delegation of this very public power to private, non-profit and charitable corporations has escaped the scrutiny that for-profit private actors have attracted in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in …

Eminent Domain: A Legal And Economic Critique, Nadia E. Nedzel, Walter Block

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.

The Downlow On Kelo: How An Expansive Interpretation Of The Public Use Clause Has Opened The Floodgates For Eminent Domain Abuse, Eric L. Silkwood

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Resolving The Intergenerational Conflicts Of Real Property Law: Preserving Free Markets And Personal Autonomy For Future Generations, Gerald Korngold

American University Law Review

This article argues that land allocation agreements (e.g., deeds, mortgages, covenants, easements, etc.) made today will have a profound and perhaps negative effect on owners in future generations. It shows that the current architecture of the land transaction system and related rules unduly favor current owners over successors, causing a negative impact on land markets and choices of future players. Moreover, the article demonstrates that current doctrine and theory do not provide adequate flexibility for future generations to deal with outmoded land allocation agreements, leading to inefficiencies and frustration of the personal autonomy of future owners. The article suggests a …

Condemned If They Do, Condemned If They Don't: Eminent Domain, Public Use Abandonment, And The Need For Condemnee Protections, Cristin Kent

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment is divided into six parts. Part II examines the historical and constitutional understandings and application of eminent domain and the public use requirement. Part III analyzes cases decided under the U.S. and Washington constitutions in which courts upheld condemnors' rights to abandon or fail to fulfill the public use of the condemned property. Part IV discusses cases outside of Washington in which courts have upheld the validity of takings even though the condemnor subsequently abandoned or failed to fulfill the public use. These cases illustrate the need for more substantive and procedural protections for condemnees. Part V argues …

Kelo V. City Of New London: A Reduction Of Property Rights But A Tool To Combat Urban Sprawl, Gregory V. Jolivette Jr.

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note will analyze the two opposing interests of property owners and of cities in the context of the Supreme Court's Public Use Clause jurisprudence and show that while the Court's decision in Kelo may have diminished property rights, the decision could render an overriding positive impact on combating urban sprawl. Part II defines urban sprawl and identifies some of its associated costs. Part III briefly describes Public Use Clause jurisprudence prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo. Part IV discusses the Court's opinion in Kelo and Justice Kennedy's concurrence. Part V examines the substantial criticism of Kelo and …