TITLE

Background Principles, Takings, and Libertarian Property: A Reply to Professor Huffman

AUTHOR(S)
Blumm, Michael C.; Ruhl, J. B.
PUB. DATE
August 2010
SOURCE
Ecology Law Quarterly;2010, Vol. 37 Issue 3, p805
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
One of the principal if unexpected, results of the Supreme Court's 1992 decision in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission is the rise of background principles of property and nuisance law as a categorical defense to takings claims. Our writings on the background principles defense have provoked Professor James Huffman, a devoted advocate for an expanded use of regulatory takings to protect landowner development rights, to mistakenly charge us with arguing for the use of common law principles to circumvent the rule of law, Supreme Court intent, and the takings clause. Actually, ours was not a normative brief at all but instead a positivistic explanation of takings cases in the lower courts since Lucas, which include judicial recognition of statutory background principles. In this Article, we respond to Huffman, examining the continuing importance of the background principles defense and explaining the trouble with his vision of libertarian property and his peculiar notion of the rule of law. We focus especially on wetlands regulation, which Huffman thinks is a recent development when in fact its origins date to medieval England, and therefore is particularly suited to the background principles defense. We conclude that background principles, as "the logically antecedent inquiry" into the nature of a claimant's property interest, are now a permanent feature of the takings landscape.
ACCESSION #
54654332

 

Related Articles

  • Forsyth-Grant v Allen.  // Estates Gazette;7/12/2008, Issue 827, p118 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the appellant brought various claims against the respondents, including a claim in nuisance for the interference with her right to light, in respect of which she sought an account of profits, or alternatively, an award of damages calculated by reference...

  • Notice to Quit Not Required Prior to Eviction Lawsuit.  // Commercial Tenant's Lease Insider;May2011, Vol. 8 Issue 9, p7 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the appeals court ruled for a property owner who sued a tenant for lease violations. It states that the owner sued the tenant for the installment of a faulty heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system, which cost 6,800 dollars for the...

  • Jones v Kernott.  // Estates Gazette;11/19/2011, Issue 1146, p104 

    The article discusses a court case wherein an unmarried couple purchased a house in joint names without declaring beneficial interests. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the court attributing 90 percent interest in property to respondent on appeal and applied the presumption of equal...

  • Waterman and another v Boyle and another. O'Grady, Eileen // Estates Gazette;3/14/2009, Issue 910, p111 

    The article discusses a court case about a dispute over right access to neighboring properties particularly a car park. It details the stories of the appellants who owned a property that they had converted into three separate but connected dwellings and the disputes began in 2004 when the...

  • Mineral lease negotiation: Devil lies in the details. Bryan, Jamie // Fort Worth Business Press;11/17/2008, Vol. 20 Issue 45, p14 

    The article deals with the disputes related to the negotiated lease terms of mineral interest owners in the U.S. The disputes are becoming prevalent due to skyrocketing lease bonuses and increased royalty amounts. Lessors who signed their leases at a time when bonuses were a $1,000 an acre and...

  • City loses appeal. Mayrer, Jessica // Missoula Independent;12/4/2014, Vol. 25 Issue 49, p6 

    No abstract available.

  • Pick v Chief Land Registrar.  // Estates Gazette;9/29/2012, Issue 1239, p125 

    The article discusses the British High Court case Pick v Chief Land Registrar. It explains insolvency-related provisions under the British Land Registration Act 2002 involved in the case. It reports details which include the transfer of the concerned property by the bankrupt proprietor, failure...

  • Odedra and another v Ball and another.  // Estates Gazette;10/20/2012, Issue 1242, p134 

    The article discusses a court case involving issues on real property. The lawsuit was filed by claimants arguing that the defendants committed nuisance and/or negligence in relation to an escape of heating oil from the defendants' oil tank onto the claimants' property. The claimants were seeking...

  • Polish Court Gives Go-Ahead to Land Claims. Kosc, Wojciech // Transitions Online;12/8/2003, pN.PAG 

    Discusses the ruling of the Polish Supreme Court on a key legal element in the quest of former owners of real estate on pre-1939 Polish territories to be compensated for the loss of property. Extent of lost property due to changes in Polish borders; Maximum amount to be received by the former...

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