Nollan v California Coastal Commission

News & Analysis as of

Bright Line Rule: Collateral Estoppel Precludes Attacks on Quasi-Judicial Permit Decisions (But Stay Tuned: Rehearing Granted on...

Simply stated: “[a] collateral attack is not a substitute for an appeal” reasoned the Second Appellate District Court in Bowman v. California Coastal Commission (2nd Dist., Div. 6, 03/18/2014, B243015) ___Cal.App.2nd___,...more

Bowman v. California Coastal Commission: New California Court of Appeal Decision Holds that a Collateral Attack is no Substitute...

Sometimes in land use law, the most impactful court holdings come from the simplest of cases. That may be the situation with the new California Court of Appeal decision in Bowman v. California Coastal Commission, issued by...more

New California Court of Appeal Opinion Holds That Supreme Court's Seminal Nollan and Dolan Opinions do Not Apply Where a Permit...

The well-known "nexus" and "rough proportionality" tests from the United States Supreme Court's opinions in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994) do not...more

U.S. Supreme Court Decision On Land-Use Exactions Impacts Developers, Government

If you have ever filed a zoning application and been subjected at the public hearing to a version of the game show “Let’s Make a Deal,” you may find of interest a June 2013 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that addresses...more

Government Need Not Satisfy Nexus and Proportionality Tests if Dedication Requirement Does Not Otherwise Constitute a Taking

Landowners routinely have to give up something in return for a government agency’s granting a discretionary permit. However, there are limits, as the government agency cannot typically demand conditions that are not...more

Real Estate Tip – Part 2: Planning Board Demands: When Are They Unconstitutional?

Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District 133 S.Ct. 2586 (2013) - In our last real estate tip, we saw how the U.S. Supreme Court under the Nollan and Dolan cases test conditions of approval under the 5th...more

Requiring Landowners To Dedicate An "Overflight" Easement Is Not A Taking, Even When All An Owner Seeks Is A Minor Building Permit

The United States Supreme Court decisions in Nollan and Dolan provide landowners with a useful tool for seeking compensation when government agencies use their land use authority to exact valuable property rights and other...more

Real Estate Tip – Planning Board Demands: When Are They Unconstitutional?

Landowners and developers often complain that their property rights have been “taken” from them as the result of conditions of approval imposed by a planning board. After all, the U.S. Constitution’s 5th Amendment enshrines...more

Koontz: The latest chapter in land use permitting and takings

In a landmark environmental case, the United States Supreme Court expanded the scope of potential governmental liability for takings. In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist, 133 S. Ct. 2586 (2013), the Court held that...more

Will Koontz Mean Big Changes or Business as Usual for Real Estate Development in California

On June 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court release its decision in Koontz v. St. John's River Water Managment District. Koontz has been called the most significant takings case since Kelo v. City of New London and has been...more

California Supreme Court to Review Inclusionary Housing Requirements

On September 11, 2013, the California Supreme Court granted the California Building Industry Association's (CBIA) petition for review challenging a San Jose ordinance that imposed "inclusionary" housing obligations on housing...more

California Supreme Court Set to Hear First Post-Koontz Takings Case

As reported by our colleague Robert Thomas on inversecondemnation.com, the California Supreme Court granted the California Building Industry Association's (CBIA) petition for review in California Building Industry Association...more

Supreme Court's Ruling in Koontz Extends Concept of Unconstitutional Takings to Monetary Exactions

Introduction - At first glance, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Coy A. Koontz, Jr. v. St. Johns River Water Management District, 570 U.S. ___ (2013), improves the ability of real estate developers to obtain...more

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Latest Attempt to Differentiate a Fair Quid Pro Quo in the Developer’s Permitting Process From an...

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued an important decision in an attempt to add clarity and help government land use planners understand the difference between reasonable requests and unreasonable demands rising to the level of...more

Zoning & Land Use -- July 2013: Supreme Court Strives to Protect Zoning Applicants from Unreasonable Government Demands

Recently the Supreme Court issued a decision that will have a material impact on applicants seeking zoning and land use related permits. In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt Dist., 2013 WL 3184628, No. 11-1447 (U.S. June...more

U.S. Supreme Court: Federal Nexus And Proportionality Analysis Applies To Land Use Permitting Fees And To Both Denial And Granting...

A Florida landowner seeking a permit to develop part of a wetlands property offered a conservation easement on the undeveloped portion of the parcel to the local water management district. The district indicated it would not...more

Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Landowner Seeking To Develop Property

On June 25, 2013, the United States Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District rendered a decision that protects the rights of property owners when seeking construction permits to develop their...more

The Supreme Court Gets It Right On Takings - And Wrong - A View from "Inside the Curtilage": The Property Owner's Perspective

In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, the Supreme Court cleared up two important, nagging issues with wide applicability and importance to property owners across the country. First, the 5-member majority,...more

The Koontz Decision: Limits Conditions a Government can Impose on Developers  [Video]

The extent to which governmental authorities may condition land use permits on exactions and concessions from land use permit applicants has received extraordinary attention from the United States Supreme Court in recent...more

US Supreme Court Protects Landowners from "Extortionate" Demands by the Government in Land-Use Permitting Decisions, Including...

In a 5-4 decision authored by Justice Alito, and joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy, the US Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District broadened the protections...more

Supreme Court Ruling May Lead to More Landowner Challenges of Land Use Regulations, Fees

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in a long-running land use case holding that “extortionate demands” by the local government entity constituted illegal interference with a property owner/developer’s right to...more

Extort Me Not: Supreme Court Expands Protections for Permit Applicants Under the Takings Clause

The high court’s decision in Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District extends the landmark decisions in Nollan and Dolan, which set standards on when an agency can condition a land use permit on the relinquishment...more

U.S. Supreme Court Expands Property Rights Protections in Koontz

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last week in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District expands the holdings of Nollan v. California Coastal Comm’n, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374...more

Court Rules Government Cannot Make "Extortionate Demands" on Persons Seeking Land-Use Permits

In a landmark decision for land use and development, the United States Supreme Court has ruled under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that regulatory agencies cannot make “extortionate demands” on land-use permit...more

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Monetary Exactions

In a victory for property owners and developers nationwide, the U.S. Supreme Court has just eliminated two main methods used by local governments to evade the Court’s landmark property rights decisions of Nollan v. California...more

41 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2