Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Land Use Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional Law

Pace University

Takings

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Land Use Law

Rising Tides--Changing Title: Court To Mull Takings Issue, John R. Nolon Aug 2009

Rising Tides--Changing Title: Court To Mull Takings Issue, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Walton County v. Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc., where novel questions arose concerning sea level rise and constitutional property rights of beachfront landowners. In Florida, the state government owns in trust, all beach property below the mean high tide water line, while beachfront landowners own the rights to any land above the mean high tide water line. The line shifts along with beachfront as the beach expands and contracts. In this Florida case, landowners challenge a state statute, which precludes the ocean property line from shifting in favor of the private …


A Warning To States — Accepting This Invitation May Be Hazardous To Your Health (Safety, And Public Welfare): An Analysis Of Post-Kelo, Joshua Ulan Galperin Apr 2007

A Warning To States — Accepting This Invitation May Be Hazardous To Your Health (Safety, And Public Welfare): An Analysis Of Post-Kelo, Joshua Ulan Galperin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Focusing on Delaware, this article will argue that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. New London gave state legislatures an open invitation to shape their public use frameworks, but their responses must be measured and well-reasoned because the consequences of reactionary legislation may put a stranglehold on state and local governments trying to exercise eminent domain for unanimously accepted public uses. Part I will trace the most pertinent federal jurisprudence through Kelo. Part II will survey Delaware’s public use jurisprudence. Part III will introduce the Delaware General Assembly’s legislative response to Kelo. Part IV will serve as …


'Takings' Clarified: U.S. Supreme Court Provides Clear Direction, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher Jun 2005

'Takings' Clarified: U.S. Supreme Court Provides Clear Direction, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court holding in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. clarified years of takings jurisprudence and overturned a controversial decision in the case of Agins v. City of Tiburon. This article discusses how the Lingle court denounced the “substantially advances” test created in Agins, as a due process inquiry rather than a proper takings test. The Lingle court instead opted to create a clear four-category paradigm for takings cases, which focuses on the burden the government places on private property rights in order to distinguish takings categories.


Court Reviews: The Takings Doctrine And Exactions, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher Feb 2005

Court Reviews: The Takings Doctrine And Exactions, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Exactions occur when applications to develop parcels of land require governmental permission, and that permission is conditioned upon dedicating part of the land to public use. Exactions have long been challenged as regulatory takings, and both federal and state courts look at these types of regulations with a heightened level of scrutiny due to the nature of exactions to remove a crucial element from the bundle of property rights associated with ownership of real property: the right to exclude. This column discusses a recent example of exactions jurisprudence applied in New York and goes on to compare that decision in …


Exacting Tests: Determining When A Taking Is Unconstitutional, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher Dec 2003

Exacting Tests: Determining When A Taking Is Unconstitutional, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the past, courts generally deferred to legislatures when determining whether a law constitutes a regulatory taking. However, not all regulations are treated equal, and different tests apply to different types of regulations. Types of land use actions with a lower threshold of constitutionally include exactions, and regulations that apply fixed fee schedules to private landowners. This article combs both federal and New York law to come to the clear determination that universal standards exist for each type of regulation.


Supreme Court Takes A Look At Takings, John R. Nolon Jul 2001

Supreme Court Takes A Look At Takings, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the case of Pazzalo v. Rhode Island the United States Supreme Court reversed a determination by the Rhode Island Supreme Court which held that land owners had no right to sue for a regulatory taking if the land owners purchased title to land on which a preexisting restriction existed. Before this case, the rule in New York also precluded landowners from challenging land use regulations that existed at the time they purchased land. After holding that a regulatory takings challenge existed, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to Rhode Island to decide whether the preexisting regulations affected the …