Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster
Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster
UF Law Faculty Publications
A vocal minority of the U.S. Supreme Court recently announced its suspicion that lower courts and state and local administrative agencies are systematically ignoring constitutional rules intended to limit, through heightened judicial review, exactions as a land use regulatory tool. This article argues that the Court's suspicions are well founded but that blame for judicial and administrative noncompliance lies with the Court's bifurcated approach to the Takings Clause.
Tahoe's Requiem: The Death Of The Scalian View Of Property And Justice, Laura S. Underkuffler
Tahoe's Requiem: The Death Of The Scalian View Of Property And Justice, Laura S. Underkuffler
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
A New Time For Denominators - Toward A Dynamic Theory Of Property In The Regulatory Takings Relevant Parcel Analysis, Danaya C. Wright
A New Time For Denominators - Toward A Dynamic Theory Of Property In The Regulatory Takings Relevant Parcel Analysis, Danaya C. Wright
UF Law Faculty Publications
This Article explores the question of how the courts should calculate the denominator in the just compensation equation. The denominator is the amount of property a claimant owns, against which the effects of regulation will be measured. If a landowner owns a single acre that is severely regulated, the takings fraction for the amount of property taken compared to that owned will approach one. If, on the other hand, the landowner owns 100 acres and only one is regulated, the amount of harm is only 1% in comparison to the total amount owned. This Article advocates a paradigm shift in …
Public Ruses, James E. Krier, Christopher Serkin
Public Ruses, James E. Krier, Christopher Serkin
Articles
The public use requirement of eminent domain law may be working its way back into the United States Constitution. To be sure, the words "public use" appear in the document-and in many state constitutions as well, but the federal provision applies to the states in any event-as one of the Fifth Amendment's limitations on the government's inherent power to take private property against the will of its owners. (The other limitation is that "just compensation" must be paid, of which more later.) Any taking of private property, the text suggests, must be for public use. Those words, however, have amounted …