Property Law and Real Estate Commons^™

The Right To Stay, Patrick M. Mcfadden

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

People often fight for their homes. Once established, homes are vital centers of life, and their threatened loss generates predictable resistance. This Article shows how the human desire not to be moved is protected by the law. Such protection can be found in both U.S. domestic and international law, although the two systems of law vary widely in their approach. Since World War II, international scholars and lawmakers have been deeply concerned with promoting the legal rights of people to leave and return to their own countries. This Article emphasizes a different, but equally important right: the right of people, …

Property Law: 1995 Survey Of Florida Law, Ronald B. Brown, Joseph M. Grohman, Manuel R. Valcarcel Iv

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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

Fordham Urban Law Journal

In the Winter 1994 issue of the Fordham Urban Law Journal, R.S. Radford reviewed Dennis Coyle's book "Property Rights and the Constitution." Radford's theory relies on the idea that property rights deserve greater constitutional protection than they have received in the 60 years since the Supreme Court accepted the legitimacy of the regulatory state. This article reviews Radford's interpretation and criticism of Coyle's theory, analyzes Radford's theories in light of recent cases, and discussed the constitutional implications of Radford's analysis and how they relate to the economic regulations that they empower.

Takings Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Property Law: 1994 Survey Of Florida Law, Ronald B. Brown, Joseph M. Grohman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Regulatory Takings And Resources: What Are The Constitutional Limits?, Virginia S. Albrecht

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

52 pages.

Contains footnotes.

Agenda: Regulatory Takings And Resources: What Are The Constitutional Limits?, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Byron R. White Center For The Study Of American Constitutional Law

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

Sponsored by the University of Colorado's Natural Resources Law Center and the Byron R. White Center for American Constitutional Study.

Conference organizers, faculty and/or moderators included University of Colorado School of Law professors David H. Getches, Lawrence J. MacDonnell, Gene R. Nichol, Jr. and Mark Squillace.

Governmental regulation for environmental protection and other important public purposes can affect the manner in which land and natural resources are developed and used. The U.S. constitution (and most state constitutions) prohibit the government from "taking" property without payment of compensation. Originally intended to apply to situations where the government physically seized private property …

Takings Clause: Saratoga Water Services, Inc. V. Saratoga County Water Authority

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Real Property: 1993 Survey Of Florida Law, Ronald B. Brown

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Hendler V. United States: Preserving Private Property Rights In The Face Of Environmental Regulation, William E. Remphrey Jr.

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Real Property: 1992 Survey Of Florida Law, Ronald B. Brown

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Loveladies Harbor, Inc. V. United States: Application Of Traditional Regulatory Taking Law To The Regulation Of Wetlands, Judith A. Johnson

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Eminent Domain (Update), James E. Krier

Book Chapters

One of the most challenging and enduring puzzles in American constitutional law is how one distinguishes a compensable taking of power from a legitimate and noncompensable exercise of the police power. To suggest the Supreme Court’s approach to the question, Harry N. Scheiber, author of the Encyclopedia’s principal article on eminent domain, looked back and away from the Court to Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw of Massachusetts.

Tenements And Takings: Tenement House Department Of New York V. Moeschen As A Counterpoint To Lochner V. New York, Judith A. Gilbert

Fordham Urban Law Journal

“The sharp rightward shift in land use law, and particularly in ‘takings’ jurisprudence, in the 1980s prompted anguished responses from advocates of government regulation who characterized the trend as a ‘return to the good old days of Locke and Lochner,’ ‘the Reagan Revolution's Lochnerian [r]eturn,’ ‘a revival of decisions like Lochner,’ ‘origins [in] the set of beliefs associated with the Lochner era,’ and ‘Back to the Future: From Nollan to Lochner.’ Critics were reacting in particular to an ominous alignment in the constitutional heavens: a constellation of United States Supreme Court decisions restricting the ability of state and local governments …

Real Property Survey, Ronald B. Brown

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Eminent Domain, Police Power, And Business Regulation: Economic Liberty And The Constitution, Philip P. Houle

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

First English: The Fifth Amendment Requires Just Compensation For A Regulatory Taking, Anne E. Sheppard

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law: Is Time Running Out For The Government To Dispute Regulatory Takings - Irst English Evangelical Lutheran Church V. City Of Los Angeles, Sharon A. Woodard

Campbell Law Review

This Note will trace the evolution of regulatory "temporary" takings from its roots in traditional eminent domain law and examine the practical effects of the Court's decision on regulatory takings analysis. The analysis will specifically question what period of time during the pendency of takings litigation will constitute a "considerable" enough length of time that it becomes a factor in takings analysis and remedies. This Note will conclude that although the First English decision will increase the number of challenges to regulator actions and increase regulator liability it probably will not enhance the actual compensation amount that aggrieved landowners receive.

Keystone Bituminous Coal Association V. Debenedictis: A Regulatory Taking, Monique Van Damme

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bargaining In The Shadow Of Eminent Domain: Valuing And Apportioning Condemnation Awards Between Landlord And Tenant, Victor P. Goldberg, Thomas W. Merrill, Daniel Unumb

Faculty Scholarship

Who has a constitutionally protected "property" interest when the government condemns land subject to a lease? Is it the landlord? The tenant? Or do both parties have property rights that entitle them to compensation? Further, how should the size of the total condemnation award be determined? Should we value the property rights of the landlord and the tenant separately and sum? Or should we value the entire parcel as if it were an undivided fee simple and apportion the award between the landlord and the tenant? If the condemnation award is based on the value of a fee simple and …

Takings Of Property And Constitutional Serendipity, Larry Alexander

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Reflection On Epstein And His Critics, Ellen Frankel Paul

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proceedings Of The Conference On Takings Of Property And The Constitution

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Last Word On Eminent Domain, Richard A. Epstein

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword, Kevin Dorse

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Outline Of Takings, Richard A. Epstein

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Malthusian Constitution, Thomas C. Grey

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Consequences Of Conceptualism, Margaret Jane Radin

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Two Faces Of Liberalism, Cass R. Sunstein

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.