Term
|
Definition
| The Court found that a state law regulating pricing did not constitute a taking. The Court established the principle of public regulation of private businesses in the public interest. |
|
|
Term
| United States v. Gettysburg Electric Railway Company 1896 |
|
Definition
| The Court ruled that the acquisition of the national battlefield at Gettysburg served a valid public purpose. This was the first significant legal case dealing with historic preservation. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The Court established the right of municipalities to regulate building height. |
|
|
Term
| Eubank v. City of Richmond 1912 |
|
Definition
| The Court first approved the use of setback regulations, although it overturned the setbacks in this case. |
|
|
Term
| Hadacheck v. Sebastian 1915 |
|
Definition
| The Court first approved the regulation of the location of land uses. The brickyard was prohibited because it was causing adverse health effects in LA. “There must be progress, and if in its march private interests are in the way they must yield to the good of the community.” |
|
|
Term
| Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon 1922 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that if a regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking. This was the first takings ruling and defined a taking under the 5th Amendment. |
|
|
Term
| Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. 1926 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that as long as the community believed that there was a threat of a nuisance, the zoning ordinance should be upheld. The exclusion of business, trade, apartment buildings from residential districts was legitimate as a police power. This is the first supreme court case to deal with zoning and validate police power as a way to initiate it/maintain it. |
|
|
Term
| Nectow v. City of Cambridge 1928 |
|
Definition
| The Court used a rational basis test to strike down a zoning ordinance because it had no valid public purpose (e.g., to promote the health, safety, morals, or welfare of the public). |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The Court held that aesthetics is a valid public purpose. The court found that urban renewal was a valid public purpose. |
|
|
Term
| Spur Industries v. Del Webb Development 1972 |
|
Definition
| Spur operated a feedlot which Del Web Development encroached on. The feedlot was determined to be a public nuisance. In able for a business to be a public nuisance, there must be a populous are in which people are injured. However, a business must also be protected from the knowing and willing encroachment of others, “coming to the nuisance”. Therefore Del had to indemnify Spur for a reasonable amount. |
|
|
Term
| Golden v. Planning Board of the Town of Ramapo 1972 |
|
Definition
| The Court upheld a growth management system that awarded points to development proposals based on the availability of public utilities, drainage facilities, parks, road access, and firehouses. A proposal would only be approved upon reaching a certain point level. Developers could increase their point total by providing the involved facilities themselves. |
|
|
Term
| Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas 1974 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that a community has the power to control lifestyle and values. The court upheld a regulation that prohibited more than two unrelated individuals from living together as a single family. |
|
|
Term
| Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mount Laurel 1975 |
|
Definition
| Mount Laurel had a zoning ordinance setting the minimum lot size to 1/2 acres for the remaining undeveloped land. The Court found that Mount Laurel had exclusionary zoning that prohibited multifamily, mobile home, or low- to moderate-income housing. The court required the Town to open its doors to those of all income levels. In Mount Laurell II, 1983, the court required inclusionary zoning to produce affordable housing. |
|
|
Term
| Construction Industry of Sonoma County v. City of Petaluma 1975 |
|
Definition
| The Court upheld quotas on the annual number of building permits issued. |
|
|
Term
| Associated Home Builders of Greater East Bay v. City of Livermore 1976 |
|
Definition
| The Court upheld temporary moratoriums on building permits. |
|
|
Term
| Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc. 1976 |
|
Definition
| The Court upheld a zoning scheme that decentralized sexually oriented businesses in Detroit. |
|
|
Term
| Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corporation 1977 |
|
Definition
| The Court reviewed a zoning case that denied a rezoning of a property from single-family to multi-family. The contract was contingent upon securing rezoning as well as federal housing assistance. The District Court held that the Village’s rezoning denial was motivated not by racial discrimination but by a desire to protect property values and maintain the Village’s zoning plan. The US Supreme Court found that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the Village acted in a racially discriminatory manner and overturned the findings of the previous two courts. |
|
|
Term
| Penn Central Transportation Co. v. The City of New York 1978 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that a taking is based on the extent of the diminution of value, interference with investment backed expectations, and the character of the government action. The court weighed the economic impact of the regulation on investment backed expectations and the character of the regulation to determine whether the regulation deprives one of property rights. The court found that the New York City Landmark Preservation Law as applied to the Grand Central Terminal did not constitute a taking. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The court determined that a municipality cannot utilize criteria based on biological or legal relationships in able to limit the types of groups that may live within its borders. |
|
|
Term
| Agins v. City of Tiburon 1980 |
|
Definition
| The Court upheld a city’s right to zone property at low-density and determined this zoning was not a taking. The appellants had acquired five acres of unimproved land for residential development. The City adopted zoning ordinances that placed the appellants’ property in a zone where property may be devoted to one-family dwellings, with density restrictions permitting appellants to build between one and five single-family residences on their tract. Without having sought approval for development of their tract under the ordinances, appellants brought suit against the city in state court, alleging that the city had taken their property without just compensation in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and seeking a declaration that the zoning ordinances were facially unconstitutional. |
|
|
Term
| Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego 1981 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that commercial and non-commercial speech cannot be treated differently. The court overruled an ordinance that banned all off-premises signs because it effectively banned non-commercial signs. |
|
|
Term
| Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corporation 1982 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that where there is a physical occupation, there is a taking. The cable television company installed cables on a building to serve the tenants of the building and to serve other buildings. The property owner brought a class action suit claiming that allowing the cable company to occupy the land was a taking. |
|
|
Term
| Members of City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent 1984 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that the regulation of signs was valid for aesthetic reasons as long as the ordinance does not regulate the content of the sign. If the regulation is based on sign content, it must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. The Court found that aesthetics advance a legitimate state interest. The Court upheld a Los Angeles ordinance that banned attaching signs to utility poles. |
|
|
Term
| City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters, Inc. 1986 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that placing restrictions on the time, place, and manner of adult entertainment is acceptable. The ordinance is not aimed at the content of the films but at the secondary effect of such theaters on the surrounding community. The Court found that the city does not have to guarantee that there is land available, at a reasonable price, for this use. However, the city cannot entirely prohibit adult entertainment. The Court upheld a zoning ordinance that limited sexually oriented businesses to a single zoning district. |
|
|
Term
| First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles 1987 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that if a property is unusable for a period of time, then not only can the ordinance be set aside, but the property owner can subject the government to pay for damages. The court found that the County could either purchase the property out-right or revoke the ordinance and pay the church for its losses during the time of the trial. |
|
|
Term
| Keystone Bituminous Coal Association v. DeBenedictis 1987 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that the enactment of regulations did not constitute a taking. The Court found that the enactment of the Act was justified by the public interests protected by the Act. Pennsylvania’s Bituminous Mine Subsidence and Land Conservation Act prohibits coal mining that causes subsidence damage to pre-existing public buildings, dwellings, and cemeteries. The Act requires that 50 percent of the coal beneath four protected structures be kept in place to provide surface support. The Coal Association alleged that this constituted a taking. |
|
|
Term
| FCC v. Florida Power Corporation 1987 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that a taking had not occurred. The public utilities challenged a federal statute that authorized the Federal Communications Commission to regulate rents charged by utilities to cable TV operators for the use of utility poles. |
|
|
Term
| Nollan v. California Coastal Commission 1987 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that regulations must serve a substantial public purpose and that exactions are valid as long as the exaction and the project are reasonably related. The court also found that the California Coastal Commission’s requirement to dedicate an easement for public beach access was not reasonable. |
|
|
Term
| Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council 1992 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that there is a taking if there is a total reduction in value (no viable value left) after the regulation is in place, except where derived from the state’s law of property and nuisance. The court found that Lucas purchased the land prior to the development regulations being put in place and so constituted a taking. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The Court found there must be a rational nexus between the exaction requirement and the development. The rough proportionality test was created from this case. The court found that conditions that require the deeding of portions of a property to the government can be justified where there is a relationship between the nature and extent of the proposed development. The court overturned an exaction that required dedication of a portion of the floodplain by a commercial business that wanted to expand. |
|
|
Term
| Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency 1997 |
|
Definition
| The Court in this case was answering the question of whether an owner must attempt to sell their development rights before claiming a regulatory taking of property without just compensation. The Court found that Suitum’s taking claim was ripe for adjudication. The petitioner owned an undeveloped lot near Lake Tahoe. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency found that the lot could not be developed under the agencies’ regulations, but that Suitum could sell the development rights under the Transfer of Development Rights program. Suitum sued claiming a taking requiring compensation. |
|
|
Term
| City of Boerne v. Flores 1997 |
|
Definition
| This Case challenged the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The City of Boerne, Texas prohibited a church in a historic district from enlarging. The Supreme Court ruled that the act is an unconstitutional exercise of congressional powers that exceeded the enforcement powers of the fourteenth amendment. In the end the city and church came to an agreement to leave 80 percent of the church intact and allow a new 750-seat auditorium on the rear of the auditorium. |
|
|
Term
| City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey Ltd. 1999 |
|
Definition
| The Supreme Court upheld a jury award of $1.45 million in favor of the development based on the city’s repeated denials of a development permit for a 190-unit residential complex on ocean front property. The development was in conformance with the city’s comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. The court found the repeated denials of permits deprived the owner of all economically viable use of the land. |
|
|
Term
| Palazzolo v. Rhode Island 2001 |
|
Definition
| The property owner claimed inverse condemnation against the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council. The land owner was denied a permit to fill 18 acres of coastal wetlands to construct a beach club and was therefore an unlawful taking. The Supreme Court found that claims are ripe for adjudication–most importantly, acquisition of title after the effective date of regulations does not bar regulatory taking claims. The case was remanded. |
|
|
Term
| Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. et al. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency et al. 2002 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that the moratoria did not constitute a taking requiring compensation. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency imposed two moratoria on development in the Lake Tahoe Basin while the agency formulated a comprehensive plan for the area. A group of property owners sued, claiming a taking. |
|
|
Term
| Lingle v. Chevron USA, Inc. 2005 |
|
Definition
| The Court overturned a portion of the Agins v. City of Tiburon precedent, declaring that regulation of property effects a taking if it does not substantially advance legitimate state interests. The court found this prong of the formula imprecise and not appropriate for determining if a taking has occurred. The other prong of the formula under Agins related to denial of economically viable use is unaffected. |
|
|
Term
| City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams 2005 |
|
Definition
| The Court ruled that a licensed radio operator that was denied conditional use permit for an antenna cannot seek damages because it would distort the congressional intent of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. |
|
|
Term
| Kelo v. City of New London 2005 |
|
Definition
| The Supreme Court ruled that a economic development is a valid use of eminent domain. The court found that it is not in a position to determine the amount or character of land needed for a particular public project. |
|
|
Term
| Massachusetts v. EPA, Inc. 2006 |
|
Definition
| The Court held that the EPA must provide a reasonable justification for why they would not regulate greenhouse gases. |
|
|
Term
| Rapanos v. United States 2006 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that the Army Corp of Engineers must determine whether there is a significant nexus between a wetland and a navigable waterway. |
|
|
Term
| SD Warren v. Maine Board of Environmental Protection 2006 |
|
Definition
| The Court found that hydroelectric dams are subject to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. |
|
|
