Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Selected Works (39)
- University of Michigan Law School (16)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (10)
- Pace University (9)
- University of Colorado Law School (9)
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (8)
- University of Maine School of Law (8)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (7)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (7)
- BLR (6)
- Notre Dame Law School (5)
- Seattle University School of Law (4)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (4)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (4)
- Widener Law (4)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- University of Montana (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Cornell University Law School (2)
- Fordham Law School (2)
- Georgetown University Law Center (2)
- Pepperdine University (2)
- The Peter A. Allard School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- West Virginia University (2)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- California Western School of Law (1)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Golden Gate University School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Articles (14)
- Faculty Scholarship (13)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (9)
- Maine Law Review (8)
- Timothy M. Mulvaney (8)
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (7)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (7)
- ExpressO (6)
- Scholarly Works (5)
- Benjamin Barros (4)
- Donald J. Kochan (4)
- Michigan Law Review (4)
- Seattle University Law Review (4)
- Touro Law Review (4)
- Danaya C. Wright (3)
- Notre Dame Law Review (3)
- Patricia E. Salkin (3)
- Public Land & Resources Law Review (3)
- Publications (3)
- The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8) (3)
- All Faculty Publications (2)
- American University Law Review (2)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (2)
- Douglas C Harris (2)
- Faculty Publications (2)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Maryland Law Review (2)
- Michael E Lewyn (2)
- Nicole Stelle Garnett (2)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 186
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Prudential Take On A Prudential Takings Doctrine, Katherine Mims Crocker
A Prudential Take On A Prudential Takings Doctrine, Katherine Mims Crocker
Michigan Law Review Online
The Supreme Court is set to decide a case requesting reconsideration of a doctrine that has long bedeviled constitutional litigants and commentators. The case is Knick v. Township of Scott, and the doctrine is the “ripeness” rule from Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank that plaintiffs seeking to raise takings claims under the Fifth Amendment must pursue state-created remedies first—the so-called “compensation prong” (as distinguished from a separate “takings prong”). This Essay argues that to put the compensation prong in the best light possible, the Court should view the requirement as a “prudential” rule rather than (as it …
Community Dignity Takings: Dehumanization And Infantilization Of Communities Resulting From The War On Drugs, Jamila Jefferson-Jones
Community Dignity Takings: Dehumanization And Infantilization Of Communities Resulting From The War On Drugs, Jamila Jefferson-Jones
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
One Parcel Plus One Parcel Equals A "Parcel As A Whole" Murr V. Wisconsin's Fluid Calculations For Regulatory Takings, Shelby D. Green
One Parcel Plus One Parcel Equals A "Parcel As A Whole" Murr V. Wisconsin's Fluid Calculations For Regulatory Takings, Shelby D. Green
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
The Court's most recent major property law case, Murr v. Wisconsin, 137 S. Ct. 1933 (2017), tackles one of the thorny, recurring issues in regulatory takings jurisprudence: what is the proper “denominator” to use in determining whether a government regulation has so greatly diminished the economic value of a parcel of land that it effects a taking? More specifically, Murr looked at what constitutes the “parcel as a whole” when a landowner holds title to two contiguous lots. Should a court assess the economic impact on the value of each lot separately or the impact on the value of the …
When Deciding Whether To Allow A Taking Of Property We Need To Ask What We Want Property Rights To Do, Douglas C. Harris
When Deciding Whether To Allow A Taking Of Property We Need To Ask What We Want Property Rights To Do, Douglas C. Harris
All Faculty Publications
In recognition of the dangers inherent to a regime that enables a majority of owners to terminate the individual property interests of a dissenting minority, the Strata Property Act requires that strata corporations secure court confirmation of dissolution votes. Not surprisingly, the shift to a lower dissolution threshold, the rapidly rising land values in British Columbia’s urban centres, and the increased costs of maintaining aging buildings, have precipitated a growing number of dissolution votes and a steady flow of applications to the British Columbia Supreme Court (BCSC) to confirm the votes.
The Power To Exclude And The Power To Expel, Donald J. Smythe
The Power To Exclude And The Power To Expel, Donald J. Smythe
Faculty Scholarship
Property laws have far-reaching implications for the way people live and the opportunities they and their children will have. They also have important consequences for property developers and businesses, both large and small. It is not surprising, therefore, that modern developments in property law have been so strongly influenced by political pressures. Unfortunately, those with the most economic resources and political power have had the most telling influences on the way property laws have developed in the United States during the twentieth century. This article introduces a normal form game – I call it the “Not-In-My-Backyard Game” – to illustrate …
Federalism, Convergence, And Divergence In Constitutional Property, Gerald S. Dickinson
Federalism, Convergence, And Divergence In Constitutional Property, Gerald S. Dickinson
Articles
Federal law exerts a gravitational force on state actors, resulting in widespread conformity to federal law and doctrine at the state level. This has been well recognized in the literature, but scholars have paid little attention to this phenomenon in the context of constitutional property. Traditionally, state takings jurisprudence—in both eminent domain and regulatory takings—has strongly gravitated towards the Supreme Court’s takings doctrine. This long history of federal-state convergence, however, was disrupted by the Court’s controversial public use decision in Kelo v. City of New London. In the wake of Kelo, states resisted the Court’s validation of the …
The [̶T̶A̶K̶I̶N̶G̶S̶] Keepings Clause: An Analysis Of Framing Effects From Labeling Constitutional Rights, Donald J. Kochan
The [̶T̶A̶K̶I̶N̶G̶S̶] Keepings Clause: An Analysis Of Framing Effects From Labeling Constitutional Rights, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. V. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency: The Reemergence Of Penn Central And A Healthy Reluctance To Craft Per Se Regulatory Takings Rules, Philip R. Saucier
Maine Law Review
In Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, the Supreme Court held that a moratorium on development imposed during the process of devising a comprehensive land use plan did not constitute a per se taking of property requiring compensation under the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution. The scope of Tahoe-Sierra, and thus its ultimate impact on Supreme Court takings jurisprudence, had been severely narrowed and redefined by the courts since the landowners first alleged a taking over fifteen years before the issue was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court. It is important to note that this …
Kelo V. City Of New London-Wrongly Decided And A Missed Opportunity For Principled Line Drawing With Respect To Eminent Domain Takings, Orlando E. Delogu
Kelo V. City Of New London-Wrongly Decided And A Missed Opportunity For Principled Line Drawing With Respect To Eminent Domain Takings, Orlando E. Delogu
Maine Law Review
No eminent domain taking case in the last twenty-five years has excited the level of interest, attention, and debate as has Kelo v. City of New London. The Supreme Court’s decision has not quelled that debate. If anything the stridency, the emotional tenor, of the debate has increased. And in the few months since the decision came down, several dozen states (in the absence of any meaningful federal limitation on what constitutes “public use”) have proposed statutes or constitutional amendments that would limit their exercise of eminent domain (taking) powers. There is even talk of federal legislation to temper, to …
A Proposal For Establishing Specialized Federal And State "Takings Courts", John Martinez
A Proposal For Establishing Specialized Federal And State "Takings Courts", John Martinez
Maine Law Review
Takings doctrine is a mess. Let's just accept that and establish specialized federal and state "takings courts" to adjudicate takings claims. Takings claims arise when governmental conduct is alleged to detrimentally affect private property. Adjudication of takings claims may initially seem straightforward: the Fifth Amendment's Just Compensation Clause, as well as analogous state constitutional provisions, plainly provide that the government shall not take private property for public use without just compensation. In 1978, the United States Supreme Court confessed that takings analysis is hopelessly ad hoc. Decades later, in 2005, the Court abrogated a test for takings that it had …
Murr V. Wisconsin, Nathan A. Burke
Murr V. Wisconsin, Nathan A. Burke
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Murr v. Wisconsin, the Court redefined how to determine private property for a regulatory taking under the Fifth Amendment. Previously, courts have primarily relied on state property principles to determine the relevant unit of property for a regulatory takings claim. However, in this case, the Court adopted a three-factor standard to determine the landowner’s reasonable expectations regarding the treatment of their property. By relying on these factors rather than only on state laws, the Court created a litigation-specific definition of property that could potentially differ from state property boundaries. The three-factor standard may also give the government an …
Written Testimony Of Gerald S. Dickinson For The U.S. Senate Hearing On Fencing Along The Southwest Border (Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs), Gerald S. Dickinson
Written Testimony Of Gerald S. Dickinson For The U.S. Senate Hearing On Fencing Along The Southwest Border (Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs), Gerald S. Dickinson
Testimony
It is with great pleasure that I submit this written testimony at the request of the Office of the Ranking Member, Senator McCaskill. I am pleased that the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is devoting its April 4, 2017 hearing to an examination of efforts to secure the southwest border through the construction of a wall. Further, as a law professor who writes and teaches in the areas of constitutional property and land use, I take great interest in the committee's focus on the legal authorities related to the wall construction along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Insuring Takings Claims, Christopher Serkin
Insuring Takings Claims, Christopher Serkin
Christopher Serkin
Local governments typically insure themselves against all kinds of losses, from property damage to legal liability. For small- and medium-sized governments, this usually means purchasing insurance from private insurers or participating in municipal risk pools. Insurance for regulatory takings claims, however, is generally unavailable. This previously unnoticed gap in municipal insurance coverage could lead risk averse local governments to underregulate and underenforce existing regulations where property owners threaten to bring takings claims. This seemingly technical observation turns out to have profound implications for theoretical accounts of the Takings Clause that focus on government regulatory incentives. This Article explores the impact …
The Illusion Of Fiscal Illusion In Regulatory Takings, Bethany R. Berger
The Illusion Of Fiscal Illusion In Regulatory Takings, Bethany R. Berger
American University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Public Stand-Off: The Wisconsin State Legislature V. Milwaukee Public Schools And Takings Of Public Property By Public Entities, Corey R. Hoze
Public Stand-Off: The Wisconsin State Legislature V. Milwaukee Public Schools And Takings Of Public Property By Public Entities, Corey R. Hoze
Mitchell Hamline Law Review
No abstract provided.
Owning And Dissolving Strata Property, Douglas C. Harris
Owning And Dissolving Strata Property, Douglas C. Harris
All Faculty Publications
Strata or condominium property creates multiple privately owned lots or units within an association of owners. Dissolving strata property involves winding-up the association and terminating the private interests. As a result, the non-consensual dissolution of strata property involves the taking of property from those owners who oppose dissolution. The owners of individual lots become co-owners of the land formerly within the association, but the non-consenting owners have their property interests in separate lots taken from them. Beginning with the observation that non-consensual dissolution of strata property results in a taking of property, this article analyzes British Columbia’s move to facilitate …
Partial Takings, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky
Partial Takings, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky
All Faculty Scholarship
Partial takings allow the government to expropriate the parts of an asset it needs, leaving the owner the remainder. Both vital and common, partial takings present unique challenges to the standard rules of eminent domain. Partial takings may result in the creation of suboptimal, and even unusable, parcels. Additionally, partial takings create assessment problems that do not arise when parcels are taken as a whole. Finally, partial takings engender opportunities for inefficient strategic behavior on the part of the government after the partial taking has been carried out. Current jurisprudence fails to resolve these problems and can even exacerbate them. …
A Hobbesian Bundle Of Lockean Sticks: The Property Rights Legacy Of Justice Scalia, J. Peter Byrne
A Hobbesian Bundle Of Lockean Sticks: The Property Rights Legacy Of Justice Scalia, J. Peter Byrne
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
No modern United States Supreme Court Justice has stimulated more thought and debate about the constitutional meaning of property than Antonin Scalia. This essay evaluates his efforts to change the prevailing interpretation of the Takings Clause. Scalia sought to ground it in clear rules embodying a reactionary defense of private owners’ prerogatives against environmental and land use regulation. Ultimately, Scalia aimed to authorize federal judicial oversight of state property law developments, whether through legislative or judicial innovation. In hindsight, he stands in a long tradition of conservative judges using property law as a constitutional baseline by which to restrain regulation.
Insuring Takings Claims, Christopher Serkin
Insuring Takings Claims, Christopher Serkin
Northwestern University Law Review
Local governments typically insure themselves against all kinds of losses, from property damage to legal liability. For small- and medium-sized governments, this usually means purchasing insurance from private insurers or participating in municipal risk pools. Insurance for regulatory takings claims, however, is generally unavailable. This previously unnoticed gap in municipal insurance coverage could lead risk averse local governments to underregulate and underenforce existing regulations where property owners threaten to bring takings claims. This seemingly technical observation turns out to have profound implications for theoretical accounts of the Takings Clause that focus on government regulatory incentives. This Article explores the impact …
Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Faculty Scholarship
Exactions — a term used to describe certain conditions that are attached to land-use permits issued at the government’s discretion — ostensibly oblige property owners to internalize the costs of the expected infrastructural, environmental, and social harms resulting from development. This Article explores how proponents of progressive conceptions of property might respond to the open question of whether legislative exactions should be subject to the same level of judicial scrutiny to which administrative exactions are subject in constitutional takings cases. It identifies several first-order reasons to support the idea of immunizing legislative exactions from heightened takings scrutiny. However, it suggests …
An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk
An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk
Articles
Takings scholarship has long focused on the niceties of Supreme Court doctrine, while ignoring the operation of takings law "on the ground" in the state and lower federal courts, which together decide the vast bulk of all takings cases. This study, based primarily on an empirical analysis of more than 2000 reported decisions ovcr the period 1979 through 2012, attempts to fill that void. This study establishes that the Supreme Court's categorical rules govern almost no state takings cases, and that takings claims based on government regulation almost invariably fail. By contrast, when takings claims arise out of government action …
Is The Government Fiscally Blind? An Empirical Examination Of The Effect Of The Compensation Requirement On Eminent-Domain Exercises, Ronit Levine-Schnur, Gideon Parchomovsky
Is The Government Fiscally Blind? An Empirical Examination Of The Effect Of The Compensation Requirement On Eminent-Domain Exercises, Ronit Levine-Schnur, Gideon Parchomovsky
All Faculty Scholarship
We empirically test the fiscal-illusion hypothesis in the takings context in Israel. Israeli law allows local governments to expropriate up to 40 percent of any parcel without compensation. In 2001, the Israeli Supreme Court created a carve out for takings of 100 percent, requiring full compensation in such cases. We analyze data for 3,140 takings cases in Tel Aviv between 1990 and 2014. There was no disproportionate share of takings of just under 40 percent. Nor was there a long-term drop in the share of 100 percent takings after 2001. Although a short-term drop in the share of 100 percent …
The New Nuisance: An Antidote To Wetland Loss, Sprawl, And Global Warming, Christine A. Klein
The New Nuisance: An Antidote To Wetland Loss, Sprawl, And Global Warming, Christine A. Klein
Christine A. Klein
Marking the fifteenth anniversary of Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council -- the modern U.S. Supreme Court's seminal regulatory takings decision -- this Article surveys Lucas's impact upon regulations that restrict wetland filling, sprawling development, and the emission of greenhouse gases. The Lucas Court set forth a new categorical rule of governmental liability for regulations that prohibit all economically beneficial use of land, but also established a new defense that draws upon the states' common law of nuisance and property. Unexpectedly, that defense has taken on a life of its own -- forming what this Article calls the new …
When Scalia Wasn't Such An Originalist, Michael Lewyn
When Scalia Wasn't Such An Originalist, Michael Lewyn
Scholarly Works
Although Justice Scalia generally described himself as an originalist, his opinion in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council rejected originalist arguments. Why? This article suggests that pre-Lucas precedent and the ambiguity of the historical record might justify his methodology.
The Strange Career Of Private Takings Of Private Property For Private Use, Jan G. Laitos
The Strange Career Of Private Takings Of Private Property For Private Use, Jan G. Laitos
Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship
Part I summarizes the two private entities thattraditionally have been conferred the power to take private property for their own private use: (1) natural resource developers and (2) common carriers involved in, andresponsible for, our country’s transportation, storage, and distribution (TS&D) system for energy infrastructure—pipelines, electrical transmission lines, and rail lines. Part II considers the traditional rationale for those private takings, which typically relies on some version ofthe notion thatthe public atlarge may, or will, eventually benefit from this private exercise of eminent domain. Part III explores the four central problems associated with these kinds of private takings: (1) the …
A Solution In Search Of A Problem: Kelo Reform Over Ten Years, Wendell Pritchett
A Solution In Search Of A Problem: Kelo Reform Over Ten Years, Wendell Pritchett
All Faculty Scholarship
Kelo is NOT Dred Scott. Kelo is not only NOT Dred Scott, it was, as this Essay will argue, the right decision given the facts of the cases and the current state of legal jurisprudence. As an academic who has detailed the historic exploitation of eminent domain to uproot persons of color in this country, I find it interesting, and somewhat troubling, that the case has received so much criticism, much more criticism, I would argue, than other Supreme Court decisions that deserve condemnation. Certainly, eminent domain, like any other government power, must be regulated carefully. But upending …
When Scalia Wasn't Such An Originalist, Michael Lewyn
When Scalia Wasn't Such An Originalist, Michael Lewyn
Michael E Lewyn
Doing A Double Take: Rail-Trail Takings Litigation In The Post-Brandt Trust Era, Danaya C. Wright
Doing A Double Take: Rail-Trail Takings Litigation In The Post-Brandt Trust Era, Danaya C. Wright
Danaya C. Wright
After providing a brief explanation of railroad development, railbanking, the takings cases, and the Brandt Trust decision, this Article will explore the implications of each of these three legal issues at the heart of the takings disputes. What makes the decision in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States particularly disappointing is not that the Court came to the wrong conclusion in its interpretation of the railroad’s interest in federally granted railroad rights of way (“FGROWs”) granted pursuant to the 1875 General Railroad Right of Way Act, but that its wrong interpretation adds all of the 1875 Act FGROW …
Reliance Interests And Takings Liability For Rail-Trail Conversions: Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust V. United States, Danaya C. Wright
Reliance Interests And Takings Liability For Rail-Trail Conversions: Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust V. United States, Danaya C. Wright
Danaya C. Wright
On October 1, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in a relatively obscure case,Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States. On its face, the case involves an interpretation of the property rights created by the General Railroad Right of Way Act of 1875, which gave to any railroad, chartered by a state or territory, "[t]he right of way [200 feet wide] through the public lands of the United States." The 1875 Act was passed after a brief hiatus in congressional support for railroads following the era of lavish land grants between 1862 and 1871, in which over 94 …
Foreground Principles, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Foreground Principles, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Timothy M. Mulvaney
The U.S. Supreme Court has declared for decades that, for Takings Clause purposes, property interests are not created by the Constitution but rather are determined by “existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law.” However, the Court has exhibited a strong normative preference for a certain type of independent source — “background principles” of the common law — over others, namely state statutory and administrative law. This Article calls this preference into question. The Article develops a model to demonstrate the four basic categories, or quadrants, of takings decisions that extensive reliance on the …