TITLE

The False Dichotomy between Physical and Regulatory Takings Analysis: A Critique of Tahoe-Sierra's Distinction between Physical and Regulatory Takings

AUTHOR(S)
Peterson, Andrea L.
PUB. DATE
May 2007
SOURCE
Ecology Law Quarterly;2007, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p381
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
This Article examines the line drawn by the U.S. Supreme Court in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency between physical and regulatory takings. Justice Stevens, writing for the Court, asserted that the two types of takings are entirely distinct, that no analogies should be drawn between them, and that physical and regulatory takings claims should be analyzed in a completely different manner from one another. This Article challenges Stevens' approach, arguing that analogies have been and should be drawn between physical and regulatory takings, and that there is no basis for using different principles to analyze physical and regulatory takings claims. Moreover, this Article asserts that in resolving takings claims, courts should focus on why the government deprived the claimant of property, regardless of whether the alleged taking involved a physical invasion or a regulatory use restriction, since the fundamental issue is whether fairness requires the payment of compensation.
ACCESSION #
27393090

 

Related Articles

  • Eminent domain facing lega challenges. Lieber, Tammy // Indianapolis Business Journal;2/21/2005, Vol. 25 Issue 51, p19 

    Focuses on the controversy over what constitutes "public use" in eminent domain. Utilization in redevelopment projects; Question being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Indiana General Assembly; Case involving the condemnation of a blighted area in New London, Connecticut.

  • How She Beat City Hall. D'Agostino, Ryan // Money;Sep2006, Vol. 35 Issue 9, p28 

    The article focuses on Susette Kelo, of New London, Connecticut. Kelo will relocate her 1893 home in a deal with the town of New London. Kelo lost a U.S. Supreme Court case in 2005 against the town, which wanted to seize her home by eminent domain. The article discusses the grassroots...

  • Development in Hillcrest and North Park. DeKoven, Robert // Gay & Lesbian Times;7/7/2005, Issue 915, p38 

    Focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court decision about the authority of the city government to convert blighted properties into productive forces within the community. Power of eminent domain to seize property for the good of the community and economy; Condemnation of homes and stores in blighted...

  • Eminent Domain Hearings. Ackerman, Andrew // Bond Buyer;2/27/2006, Vol. 355 Issue 32327, p29 

    The article reports on the hearings conducted by Maryland legislators on proposals to curb the use of eminent domain. The legislative response to the case "Kelo v. New London" decision by the United States Supreme Court will unlikely generate new laws in the state. 43 related bills were proposed...

  • Eminent domain ruling ripples through country. Solnik, Claude // Long Island Business News (7/1993 to 5/2009);8/19/2005, Vol. 52 Issue 34, p6B 

    Reports on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the use of eminent domain for private development. Conditions under the eminent domain; Purpose of the constitutional amendment proposed by different states; Reaction of several lawyers about the decision of the court.

  • High Court Rubber-Stamps Regulatory Robbery. Paige, Sean // Insight on the News;5/20/2002, Vol. 18 Issue 18, p47 

    Reports that a home-building moratorium near Lake Tahoe, California did not constitute a taking as defined by the U.S. Constitution, according to a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. Definition of willing sellers; Argument of the minority decision; Implications of the decision for landowners.

  • Palazzio v. Rhode Island: Ripeness and 'Notice' Rule Clarified and Statutory 'Background Principles' Narrowed. Callies, David L.; Chipchase, Calvert G. // Urban Lawyer;Fall2001, Vol. 33 Issue 4, p907 

    Analyzes the Palazzio versus Rhode Island U.S. Supreme Court case on the law of property takings. Facts on the case; Claims of the plaintiff against the state of Rhode Island; Outcome of the case.

  • NOT FOR SALE. Langdon, Philip // Planning;Apr2005, Vol. 71 Issue 4, p12 

    This article reports on facts related to a 90-acre patch of land in New London, Connecticut. For more than four years, a 90-acre patch of land in New London, Connecticut has occupied center stage in the city's--and the nations--most momentous battle over eminent domain. The decision in Kelo v....

  • Raisin farmers triumph over feds at Supreme Court. Wheeler, Lydia // Hill;6/23/15, Vol. 22 Issue 65, p13 

    The article reports on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court for the court case Horne v. the Department of Agriculture on June 22, 2015 regarding the need for the government to pay a just compensation for personal property, including a real property, under the Fifth Amendment.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics