Property Law and Real Estate Commons^™

Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Despite its enormous influence on constitutional law, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon is just such an opinion; the primary purpose of the author’s article Jam for Justice Holmes: Reassessing the Significance of Mahon is to clarify Holmes's intent by placing the opinion in historical context and in the context of Holmes's other opinions. While other scholars have also sought to place Mahon in context, his account differs in large part because of its recognition, as part of the background of Mahon, of a separate line of cases involving businesses affected with a public interest.

The author argues that at …

Governmental Takings, Court Of Appeals: Gazza V. New York State Department Of Environmental Conservation

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Early Patent Publication: A Boon Or Bane? A Discussion On The Legal And Economic Effects Of Publishing Patent Applications After 18 Months Of Filing, John F. Duffy, Hayden Gregory, Robert Rines, Herbert Wamsley, Douglas Wyatt

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Jam For Justice Holmes: Reassessing The Significance Of Mahon, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

When courts and commentators discuss Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, they use the same word with remarkable regularity: famous. Mahon has achieved this fame in part because it was the occasion for conflict between judicial giants, and because the result seems ironic. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.--the great Lochner dissenter and a jurist generally considered a champion of judicial deference to legislatures in the sphere of economic decision-making--wrote the opinion striking down a Pennsylvania statute barring coal mining that could cause the surface to cave-in. Sharply dissenting from Holmes's opinion was his consistent ally on the Court, Justice Louis …

Translation Without Fidelity: A Response To Richard Epstein’S Fidelity Without Translation, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article is a response to Fidelity Without Translation by Richard Epstein (1997).

Explaining why a body of work is influential is inevitably a complex matter, but part of the success of Professor Epstein’s writings undoubtedly stems from their grounding in the original understanding of the Constitution. He has claimed the mantle of the framers, and that claim gives his reading of the takings clause a deep resonance it would not otherwise have.

Explicitly rejecting Epstein’s reading of the clause and the history that lay behind its adoption, the author has previously advanced his own view of the original understanding …

Compensation And The Interconnectedness Of Property, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Joseph Sax's scholarship on the Takings Clause combines the craft of a first-class lawyer with the passion of a visionary. The good lawyer that he is, Sax's scholarship reflects a deep understanding of Supreme Court case law, legal history, and the practical dimensions of various kinds of land use disputes. Yet his work on takings is not animated by any desire for mere doctrinal tidiness. It is driven by a distinctive vision – one in which the earth's resources are becoming increasingly interconnected and in which there is an increasing need for the government to resolve conflicts regarding the …

Land Use Regulation And The Takings Clause: How Much Use Must An Owner Lose Before Being Entitled To Compensation Because The Government Has Taken The Property?, Patrick C. Mcginley

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Two- And Three-Dimensional Property Rights, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Armstrong Principle, The Narratives Of Takings, And Compensation Statutes, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment is famous for inspiring disagreement. More than one hundred years have passed since the Supreme Court departed from the original understanding of the clause and interpreted regulations as potentially falling within its ambit. Although the passage of time has established the principle that regulations can run afoul of the Takings Clause, the Court has been unable to offer a coherent vision of when compensation is required. Academic commentators also have failed to reach agreement on the issue, offering an enormous range of solutions to the takings question. The newest field of controversy involves …

Brief Of Lone Wolf, Principal Chief Of The Kiowas, To The Supreme Court Of The American Indian Nations, S. James Anaya

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Secret Lives Of The Four Horsemen, Barry Cushman

Journal Articles

"Outlined against red velvet drapery on the first Monday of October, the Four Horsemen rode again. In dramatic lore they are known as Famine, Pestilence, Destruction, and Death. These are only aliases. Their real names are Van Devanter, McReynolds, Sutherland, and Butler. They formed the crest of the reactionary cyclone before which yet another progressive statute was swept over the precipice yesterday morning as a packed courtroom of spectators peered up at the bewildering panorama spread across the mahogany bench above." Or so Grantland Rice might have written, had he been a legal realist. For more than two generations scholars …

Review Of Regulatory Takings: Law, Economics And Politics, By William A. Fischel, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article reviews Regulatory Takings: law, Economics and Politics by William A. Fischel (1997).

William Fischel's Regulatory Takings confronts one of the most difficult and significant questions in constitutional law: how should courts determine which government regulations run afoul of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, which requires the government to provide compensation when it takes private property? Broadly read, the clause would bar government regulations with redistributive consequences, thus rendering the modern regulatory state unconstitutional. This reading, championed by Professor Richard Epstein, has achieved great prominence in academic and political debates, but the vast preponderance of judges and …

Ten Years Of Takings, Gregory S. Alexander

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No area of property law has been more controversial in the past decade than takings. No aspect of constitutional law more sharply poses the dilemma about the legitimate powers of the regulatory state than the just compensation question. No question concerning constitutional property is more intractable than what sorts of government regulatory actions constitute uncompensated "takings" of private property.

Limitations of space, not to mention my own ambivalence about many of the issues, prevent me from developing a complete normative theory of the proper scope of the Takings Clause. My aim here is vastly more modest: to outline the basic …

The State As Landlord: The Constitutionality Of The Termination Of Public Housing Leases On Account Of A Tenant's Illegal Activities, Mark Anthony Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

Paragraph 107(l)(b) of the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Act enables landlords to evict tenants on short notice for engaging in illegal activity or for permitting such activity to be conducted in or on any part of the rental premises. Under this provision, the landlord can serve a notice of termination on the tenant, who may then exercise his/her right to dispute the landlord's allegation at a scheduled court hearing.

This paper suggests that paragraph 107(l)(b) is inconsistent with the underlying purposes of the Landlord and Tenant Act, and might run afoul of sections 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter …

Takings And Property Rights Legislation, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Over the years, regulatory takings case law has supported land use regulations by cloaking them with a presumption of validity and placing a heavy burden on their challengers of proving either that the regulation fails to substantially advance a legitimate public purpose or that it deprives the owner of all economically beneficial use of the land. Insulated in this way, regulators, on occasion, have transgressed the boundaries of fundamental fairness.

Florida's Property Rights Act: A Political Quick Fix Results In A Mixed Bag Of Tricks, Sylvia R. Lazos

Scholarly Works

This Article discusses Florida’s 1995 Property Rights Act, which grants to private property owners an alternative cause of action, outside of takings law, when they are permanently denied reasonable use of their land by regulatory actions. The Act also grants alternative procedures for property owners, outside of the judicial and administrative process. Thus, the Act does not change Florida takings law nor does it alter the substance of Florida's sometimes controversial growth management laws.

This article reviews the political climate that made passage of the Act possible and places the property rights initiative in the historical context of populist politics. …

A Congressional Call To Arms: The Time Has Come For Congress To Enforce The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, Mark W. Smith

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Takings" Jurisprudence In The U.S. Supreme Court: The Past 10 Years, Gregory S. Alexander

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No area of American property law has been more controversial in recent years than the government regulation of uses of private property. No aspect of American constitutional law more sharply poses the dilemma about the legitimate powers of the regulatory state than the requirement that the government pay compensation for takings of property. The purpose of this essay is to acquaint the non-American legal scholar who is unfamiliar with the recent developments in the United States Supreme Court “takings” jurisprudence. The essay does not presuppose any background knowledge about either American constitutional or property law. Instead it attempts to familiarize …

Property: A Special Right, Laura S. Underkuffler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Residential Zoning Regulations And The Perpetuation Of Apartheid, Janai S. Nelson

Faculty Publications

In January of 1996, the South African Parliament ratified the long-awaited Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Bill, which has engendered heated controversy since its inception. For many, the success of the Land Reform Bill portends the economic and political future of South Africa and is a gauge of apartheid's vital signs. Without land, most South Africans would remain in the same impoverished and disenfranchised conditions that they were in under the apartheid regime. With land, however, South Africans have an improved chance to achieve economic equality. Land reform and land use have become particularly crucial issues in light of President Mandela's …

Takings And The Nature Of Property, Laura S. Underkuffler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Responsibility, Causation, And The Harm-Benefit Line In Takings Jurisprudence, Glynn S. Lunney Jr

Faculty Scholarship

As one of the guarantees provided in the Bill of Rights, the Fifth Amendment's Compensation Clause restricts government's otherwise largely plenary power over privately-held property rights. While the Compensation Clause does not directly limit government's ability to change, modify, or even eliminate existing privately-held property rights, in certain instances it circumscribes government's ability to force individual property owners to bear the cost of such government-imposed changes. Specifically, for those government-imposed property redistributions found to be "takings" within the meaning of the Compensation Clause, the Fifth Amendment requires federal and state governments to compensate the property holder for the taking, and …

Civil Forfeiture And The Eighth Amendment After Austin, James E. Beaver, Kit G. Narodick, Joseph M. Wallin

Seattle University Law Review

Imagine owning an expensive piece of property, a piece of real estate perhaps, or maybe a car or boat. Now imagine having your property forcefully taken away from you because someone suspects, or pretends to suspect, that you are using the property in the commission of criminal acts. Then, imagine having to hire a lawyer and start a lawsuit to recover your property. After spending a small fortune in legal fees to recover your own property, imagine you lose your lawsuit, not because you could not prove your rightful ownership before its forceful seizure, but because you could not prove …

Takings Law And The Regulatory State: A Response To R.S. Radford, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the Winter 1994 issue of the Fordham Urban Law Journal, R.S. Radford provided an illuminating review of Dennis Coyle's book Property Rights and the Constitution. Radford observes that, in addition to studying post-New Deal land use cases, Coyle "provides an ideological framework that illuminates several key strands in the constitutional jurisprudence of property law ... [and] sets forth his own theories of the vital role of private property in creating and maintaining the American constitutional system." Radford's review is a generally enthusiastic one. He sees Coyle's book as providing a much-needed corrective to "the existing pro-regulatory bias …

Has The U.S. Supreme Court Finally Drained The Swamp Of Takings Jurisprudence? The Impact Of Lucas V. South Carolina Coastal Council On Wetlands And Coastal Barrier Beaches, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article argues that the Court's reliance on the law of property neither creates an internal inconsistency in takings law nor necessarily leads to further destruction of natural resources. Background principles of property law, such as custom and public trust, have long provided a basis for government protection of the public's interest in certain types of land, like the barrier beach David Lucas sought to develop.

Thus, the Lucas case need not be perceived as casting a constitutional cloud over laws protecting important ecosystems like wetlands and barrier beaches. The decision may not place these resources in greater danger from …

The Original Understanding Of The Takings Clause And The Political Process, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The original understanding of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment was clear on two points. The clause required compensation when the federal government physically took private property, but not when government regulations limited the ways in which property could be used. In 1922, however, the Supreme Court's decision in Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon established a new takings regime. In an opinion by Justice Holmes, the Court held that compensation must be provided when government regulation "goes too far" in diminishing the value of private property. Since that decision, the Supreme Court has been unable to define clearly what kind …

Taking A Look At The Modem Takings Clause Jurisprudence: Finding Private Property Protection Under The Federal And Utah Constitutions, David W. Tufts

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antitrust And First Amendment Implications Of Professional Real Estate Investors, Gary Myers

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Regulation Of Water Use And Takings: A Growing Battlefield, Barton H. Thompson, Jr.

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

43 pages.

Contains references.

Management Approaches To Addressing Takings Issues: Endangered Species Protection, I. Michael Heyman

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

15 pages.

Contains footnotes.