Coolhunting The Law, Mark Fenster
Dec 2006
Coolhunting The Law, Mark Fenster
Mark Fenster
This symposium essay, offers a small critique of Victor Fleischer's interesting and valuable work on branding as part of an initial public offering strategy (e.g., the Google and MasterCard IPOs). It seeks to complicate both the idea of the "brand" both as a mysterious means of communication and the notion that an attorney can and should, in his professional role as legal counsel, attempt to assist a client to create "brand" value in its regulatory compliance.
Regulating Land Use In A Constitutional Shadow: The Institutional Contexts Of Exactions, Mark Fenster
Dec 2006
Regulating Land Use In A Constitutional Shadow: The Institutional Contexts Of Exactions, Mark Fenster
Mark Fenster
In a refreshingly clear and comprehensive decision issued towards the end of its 2004 Term, the Supreme Court explained in Lingle v. Chevron (2005) that the Takings Clause requires compensation only for the effects of a regulation on an individual’s property rights. Under the substantive due process doctrine, by contrast, courts engage in a deferential inquiry into both a regulation’s validity and the means by which the regulation attempts to meet the government’s objective. Lingle’s explanation appeared to cast doubt on the doctrinal foundation and reach of Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994), …
The Takings Clause, Version 2005: The Legal Process Of Constitutional Property Rights, Mark Fenster
Dec 2006
The Takings Clause, Version 2005: The Legal Process Of Constitutional Property Rights, Mark Fenster
Mark Fenster
The three takings decisions that the Supreme Court issued at the end of its October 2004 Term marked a stunning reversal of the Court’s efforts the past three decades to use the Takings Clause to define a set of constitutional property rights. The regulatory takings doctrine, which once loomed as a significant threat to the modern regulatory state, now appears after Lingle v. Chevron to be a relatively tame, if complicated, check on exceptional instances of regulatory abuse. At the same time, the Public Use Clause, formerly an inconsequential limitation on the state’s eminent domain authority, now appears ripe for …
