City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes

Higley, Charles J.
August 2000
Ecology Law Quarterly;2000, Vol. 27 Issue 3, p603
Academic Journal
Argues that by removing substantive due process language from takings doctrine, the United States Supreme Court can separate the issues of government propriety and compensation in the City of Monterey, California versus Del Monte Dunes case. Background on the Del Monte Dunes case; Supreme Court decision on the case; History of the confused nature of the takings and substantive due process; Treatment of the relationship between the due process and takings clauses.


Related Articles

  • Paving a Road, Reaffirming a Roadblock: City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd. Holden, Jason // Public Land & Resources Law Review;2000, Vol. 21, p145 

    The article reviews the factual and procedural background of the U.S. Supreme Court case entitled City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd. The Del Monte Dunes case was the first time a jury verdict of regulatory taking and just compensation to the property owner was upheld. It was a...

  • Canadian regulators take property without compensation. Aston, R. Lee // Engineering & Mining Journal (00958948);Mar1994, Vol. 195 Issue 3, p16JJ 

    Reports on British Columbia Court of Appeals' decision on the case of `Casamiro Resources Corp. vs. B.C.' about the government's duty to compensate owner for the regulatory expropriation of its mineral claims within provincial parks. Reference to the precedent case of `Cream Silver Mines Ltd....

  • Cases in brief.  // Appraisal Journal;Jan1994, Vol. 62 Issue 1, p159 

    Presents a summary of the Texas case `Westgate Ltd. v. State,' in which the court ruled that a property owner may not recover economic damage caused by the government's public announcement of plans to condemn property in the future. Case details.

  • Cases in brief.  // Appraisal Journal;Jan1995, Vol. 63 Issue 1, p125 

    Presents the Missouri case `State Ex Rel. Hwy. Com'n v. Musterman' involving a land condemnation proceeding in which the court found inadmissible an expert testimony on business value.

  • Cases in brief.  // Appraisal Journal;Jan1995, Vol. 63 Issue 1, p126 

    Presents the Michigan case `C. Murphy, M.D., P.C. v. Detroit' in which the court found insupportable a claim for inverse condemnation as a result of urban renewal project.

  • Cases in brief.  // Appraisal Journal;Oct96, Vol. 64 Issue 4, p437 

    Presents the case of `Basic Energy Corporation versus Hamilton County.' Background information regarding the case; Decision of the District Court of Appeal of Florida.

  • Private property prevails in high court.  // Consumer Comments;Jul/Aug94, Vol. 18 Issue 1, p4 

    Reports on the decision of the Oregon Supreme Court in the case of `Dolan vs. Tigard' on the rights of property owners against the state's power of eminent domain. Background of the case.

  • Are we being taken by takings? Byrnes, Patricia // Wilderness (07366477);Spring95, Vol. 58 Issue 208, p4 

    Looks at proposed legislation on `takings,' defined by sponsors as any limitations on the use of property that reduces the property's value and consequently requires compensation, without which the owner can use the property in any way, even if harmful to the public. Organizations behind the...

  • Eminent domain. Peck, Robert S.; Richardson, L. Anita // ABA Journal;Apr94, Vol. 80 Issue 4, p42 

    Presents a summary of `Dolan v. City of Tigard' No. 93-518 to be argued March 23, 1994. Case background; Legitimacy of taking Dolan's land by the city government; Dolan's claim.


Read the Article


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

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics