Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Property" In The Fifth Amendment: A Quest For Common Ground In The Maze Of Regulatory Takings, David C. Buck
"Property" In The Fifth Amendment: A Quest For Common Ground In The Maze Of Regulatory Takings, David C. Buck
Vanderbilt Law Review
In 1922, the Supreme Court embarked on its first decision to protect property owners from unbridled, uncompensated government regulation. Prior to Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, the courts applied the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendments only to "'direct appropriation[s]' of property ... or the functional equivalent of a 'practical ouster of [the owner's] possession.' " Mahon established that governmental regulation that affects an owner's use of his land may constitute a taking under the Fifth Amendment. In Mahon, Justice Holmes recognized the need for constitutional limits on the government's power to impair certain rights inherent in the ownership …
Dashed "Investment-Backed" Expectations: Will The Constitution Protect Property Owners From Excesses In Implementation Of The Growth Management Act?, Elaine Spencer
Seattle University Law Review
Section I briefly discusses the basic principles of takings law as enunciated by prior cases, as well as the United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, and the Washington Supreme Court's recent decisions in Sintra, Inc. v. Seattle and Robinson v. Seattle. Although the Lucas decision has received considerable publicity, it advanced the state of the law rather little. The real guidance for future decisions arising out of the GMA will come from earlier United States Supreme Court decisions and the Washington Supreme Court's decisions in Sintra, Robinson, and Lutheran …
Takings Law, Lucas, And The Growth Management Act, John M. Groen, Richard M. Stephens
Takings Law, Lucas, And The Growth Management Act, John M. Groen, Richard M. Stephens
Seattle University Law Review
In light of Lucas and the recent constitutionally questionable Washington decisions, government entities charged with implementing the GMA may have a more difficult time avoiding takings liability than previously thought. Accordingly, this Article first seeks to clarify the modern takings analysis as refined by Lucas. Second, Washington takings precedent is contrasted with the federal approach and several key changes are suggested to make state law consistent with controlling federal precedent. Third, key aspects of the GMA are identified that can be expected to raise takings implications. By identifying potential trouble spots in the GMA now, hopefully some takings will …