Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Land Use Law (6)
- Property Law and Real Estate (6)
- Constitutional Law (5)
- State and Local Government Law (4)
- Environmental Law (1)
-
- First Amendment (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- Intellectual Property Law (1)
- Internet Law (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Military, War, and Peace (1)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (1)
- Taxation-State and Local (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
U.S. Supreme Court’S 2004 Term Includes Significant Land Use Decisions With A Trilogy Of Takings Cases, Patricia E. Salkin
U.S. Supreme Court’S 2004 Term Includes Significant Land Use Decisions With A Trilogy Of Takings Cases, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Bargaining For Takings Compensation, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky
Bargaining For Takings Compensation, Abraham Bell, Gideon Parchomovsky
All Faculty Scholarship
Efficiency and fairness require paying full compensation to property owners when their property is taken by eminent domain. Yet, to date, the evidentiary challenge of proving subjective value has proved insurmountable, and current law requires condemnees to settle for fair market value. This Article proposes a self-assessment mechanism that can make full compensation at subjective value practical. Under our proposal, property owners must be given the opportunity to state the value of the property designated for condemnation. Once property owners name their price, the government can take the property only at that price. However, if the government chooses not to …
'Takings' Clarified: U.S. Supreme Court Provides Clear Direction, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher
'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.
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Rhetorics Of Taking Cases: It's Mine V. Let's Share, Susan Ayres
The Rhetorics Of Taking Cases: It's Mine V. Let's Share, Susan Ayres
Faculty Scholarship
Regulatory takings cases originated in 1922 when Justice Holmes, in Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, ruled that "while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if a regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking." This simple rule has resulted in over eighty years of case law that Carol Rose states has left takings law to "muddle along." While many legal scholars decry the incoherence and inconsistency of takings case law, this article provides a rhetorical analysis that explains the "muddle" as a result of rhetorical tensions between a Sophistic approach ("Let's Share") and an Aristotelian …
Court Reviews: The Takings Doctrine And Exactions, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher
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 …
At Last, Some Clarity: The Potential Long-Term Impact Of Lingle V. Chevron And The Separation Of Takings And Substantive Due Process, Benjamin Barros
At Last, Some Clarity: The Potential Long-Term Impact Of Lingle V. Chevron And The Separation Of Takings And Substantive Due Process, Benjamin Barros
Benjamin Barros
This short essay discusses the Supreme Court's recent decision in Lingle v. Chevron and its potential long-term impact on the Court's regulatory takings doctrine. Lingle involved a narrow (though important) issue of takings law, and on the surface it appears to be a relatively modest case. A deeper look, however, reveals that in its separation of substantive due process and regulatory takings, Lingle has tremendous potential to clarify regulatory takings doctrine. If this potential is fulfilled, Lingle is likely to be far more significant in the long term than Kelo v. City of New London, which has dominated the commentary …
Community Redevelopment, Public Use, And Eminent Domain, Patricia E. Salkin, Lora A. Lucero
Community Redevelopment, Public Use, And Eminent Domain, Patricia E. Salkin, Lora A. Lucero
Scholarly Works
Published just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down their controversial decision on Kelo v. City of New London in 2005, this article, in correctly predicting the outcome of the Supreme Court opinion, explores in Section I how the concept of what constitutes a public use has evolved over the decades from traditionally accepted uses such as public roads, buildings (e.g., government buildings and schools), and utilities to urban redevelopment. It explains how the broad concepts of community redevelopment have been stretched to encompass needed economic development projects that promise jobs, tax revenue, and other public benefits similar to …
The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow
The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow
Faculty Publications
Eminent domain and thought control are occurring in cyberspace. Through the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), the government transfers domain names from domain-name owners to private parties based on the owners' bad-faith intent. The owners receive no just compensation. The private parties who are recipients of the domain names are trademark holders whose trademarks correspond with the domain names. Often the trademark holders have no property rights in those domain names: trademark law only allows mark holders to exclude others from making commercial use of their marks; it does not allow mark holders to reserve the marks for their own …
'Oh Lord, Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood!': Rediscovering The Mathews V. Eldridge And Penn Central Frameworks, Gary S. Lawson
'Oh Lord, Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood!': Rediscovering The Mathews V. Eldridge And Penn Central Frameworks, Gary S. Lawson
Faculty Scholarship
Mathews v. Eldridge, which addresses the procedures that must be provided for deprivations of life, liberty, or property under the Due Process Clauses, and Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York, which guides inquiry into when governmental regulations rise to the level of takings of property that require just compensation, are decisions with near-canonical status. Mathews and Penn Central have some noteworthy parallels. Each decision is widely regarded as prescribing a three-factor test for resolving questions that arise under its respective domain. Each decision is almost universally decried as unworkable, incomplete, subjective, and incapable of consistent application. And …
Mind The Gap: Expansion Of Texas Governmental Immunity Between Takings And Tort., Jadd F. Masso
Mind The Gap: Expansion Of Texas Governmental Immunity Between Takings And Tort., Jadd F. Masso
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Jennings v. City of Dallas, the city’s wastewater collection division was dispatched to unstop a clogged sewer main but instead caused sewage to spew into the Jennings’ home with dramatic force, causing extensive damage. The Jennings subsequently filed suit against the city, alleging its actions constituted an unconstitutional taking, damaging, or destruction of their property for public use without adequate compensation in violation of Article I, § 17 of the Texas Constitution. The issue presented from the case was whether an individual citizen should be liable for such losses when the damage—as an incident to governmental action—in effect benefits …
The Interpretive Project And The Problem Of Legitimacy, Barbara K. Bucholtz
The Interpretive Project And The Problem Of Legitimacy, Barbara K. Bucholtz
Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works
It is remarkable that the common law remains as vibrant and as vulnerable today as it was in the nineteenth century. Its vibrancy continues to be illuminated by its responsiveness to societal changes; its vulnerability continues to reflect the flip-side of that responsiveness: an inherent indeterminacy. The analysis that follows investigates the feasibility of maintaining the former characteristic while curtailing the latter, and it is limited to the common law in its interpretive capacity. The principal focus of the analysis is, in keeping with the theme of the conference, the common law of contracts. From that perspective, the Article articulates …
Gone Too Far: Measure 37 And The Perils Of Over-Regulating Land Use, Sara C. Bronin
Gone Too Far: Measure 37 And The Perils Of Over-Regulating Land Use, Sara C. Bronin
Sara C. Bronin
In November 2004, Oregonians passed a ballot measure, Measure 37, that presented a radical remedy for landowners by preventing the state from engaging in regulatory takings without compensating landowners. It required that local governments either monetarily compensate landowners whose properties fall in value as a result of land use regulations or, under certain conditions, exempt those landowners from the regulations altogether. At its core, Measure 37 addressed Oregon voters' concern that - for all the good the land use system had done - the government had gone too far in prohibiting landowners from using their land as they saw fit. …