Land use regulations and the Takings Clause: are courts applying a tougher standard to regulators after Nollan?
Article Abstract:
Commentators assumed that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, holding that the state could not condition the issuance of a building permit on the grant of an easement across private property without paying just compensation, would change future takings analysis. Although the Nollan Court appeared to apply a heightened scrutiny test in finding that California's means, the easement requirement, did not justify its end, public beach access, courts since Nollan have not required land use regulations to satisfy strict scrutiny. At best, courts still apply the usual rationality review to takings cases, but are perhaps less deferential to state governmental actions.
Publication Name: Natural Resources Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-0739
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
(Takings issues in the context of environmental regulations.)(Case Note)
Article Abstract:
The Florida District Court of Appeal ruled in Florida Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission v. Flotilla Inc. that the commission's temporary restrictions on the development company was not a regulatory taking under the Fifth Amendment and was therefore not entitled to compensation. A bald eagle nest was discovered on property Flotilla was developing and the commission restricted Flotilla's construction activities while the eagles were nesting. Since Flotilla was able to find purchasers for all its units in spite of construction delays, the court ruled appropriately.
Publication Name: Natural Resources Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-0739
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
The determination of property rights in public contracts after Winstar v. United States: where has the Supreme Court left us?
Article Abstract:
The U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Winstar Corp. overlooked the distinction between the government's roles as regulator and market participant. These two roles should determine the application of the unmistakability doctrine and the sovereign acts doctrine in interpreting federal contracts. A basic framework is suggested that could enhance consistency in interpretation under the appropriate contractual model.
Publication Name: Natural Resources Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-0739
Year: 1998
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Final regulations soften the rules on conversion transactions. Today's R&D venture requires hands-on investing
- Abstracts: Users' rights and the probation service: some opportunities and obstacles. Thinking about the future of probation inspection
- Abstracts: Safety violations: how to stop them. Risk pricing: an alternative to workplace safety legislation? Changing behavior: improving safety
- Abstracts: Adoption and the Constitution: are adoptive parents really "strangers without rights"? A rape in cyberspace or how an evil clown, a Haitian trickster spirit, two wizards, and a cast of dozens turned a database into a society
- Abstracts: Battle of the accounting bits. Internet legal research organizer. 27 tips for a successful document assembly project