1 / 15

Constitutional Limitations on Regulatory Takings: The 5th Amendment and Property Rights

This unit explores the framework of constitutional limitations on regulatory takings as governed by the 5th Amendment. It emphasizes that private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation, detailing concepts such as public use, fair market value (FMV), and the eminent domain procedure in North Carolina. It examines significant U.S. Supreme Court cases like Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council and Dolan v. City of Tigard, while highlighting the distinctions between physical and regulatory takings, as well as procedural steps in condemnation actions.

ohio
Télécharger la présentation

Constitutional Limitations on Regulatory Takings: The 5th Amendment and Property Rights

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Unit 7 Constitutional Limitations Regulatory Takings: Condemnation, Regulation and Impermissible Takings of Private Property

  2. 5th Amendment Takings Clause • “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” • Public use • Just compensation

  3. Public Use • All governmental uses of property • Private, for profit, public utilities • Urban renewal

  4. Just Compensation • Fair Market Value (FMV) • The price that a willing buyer would pay a willing seller

  5. Eminent Domain in NC • Power conferred solely by General Assembly • Condemnors • Public • Private

  6. Eminent Domain Procedure • No prior offer to purchase required • Notice • Institution of action • Service of summons & complaint • Deposit with the court • Answer by defendant

  7. Eminent Domain Procedure • Determination of damages & other issues • Commissioners used if sole issue is compensation • Trial de novo from findings of commissioners • Vesting of title • Quick take • Standard

  8. Inverse Condemnation • No legal action by public entity • Corresponds to the torts of trespass or nuisance • Physical v. nonphysical • Attorney fees available (NC)

  9. U.S. Supreme Court Decisions • Physical invasion • Regulatory takings • Usually, but not necessarily, nonphysical

  10. U.S. Supreme Court Decisions • Lucas v. S.C. Coastal Council (1992) • Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994) • Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) • Loretto v. TelePrompter Manhattan CATV Corp. (1982)

  11. Other cases • Loveladies Harbor, Inc. v. U.S. (Fed. Cir. 1994) - framework problem [appeal from U.S. Court of Federal Claims] • Florida Rock Industries, Inc. v. U.S. (Fed. Cir. 1994) - partial taking • Bormann v. Bd. Of Supervisors in & for Kossuth Co., Iowa (Iowa Supreme Court 1998)

  12. NC Law • Exactions • Meets need created by developer • Commensurate benefit to development • Schools & general road improvements forbidden in N.C.

  13. NC Law • No state equivalent of Takings Clause • NC cases more generous than federal • Partial takings • Calculation • FMV before less FMV after • Offsets

  14. Summary of limitations on federal & state power • Constitutional • Statutory • Institutional

  15. Constitutionality of Zoning • Uniform scheme • No spot zoning • No guarantee of highest & best use

More Related