News & Analysis as of September 20, 2024

Supreme Court of the United States › Regulatory Takings

+ Follow

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term. The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -

Supreme Court Could Open the Door to “Regulatory Takings” Challenges to Regulations

ArentFox Schiff on 10/26/2023

The US Supreme Court has announced it will evaluate whether “impact fees” associated with permits can violate the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution. At stake is the determination of when, how, and under what...more

Zoning and Development Newsletter - July 2023

Sullivan & Worcester on 7/14/2023

Sullivan's Permitting & Land Use Practice Group and Litigation Department have released the second issue of their Zoning and Development Newsletter. The publication aims to provide our firm's clients and others interested...more

The Supreme Court - June 28, 2021

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on 6/29/2021

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued the following two per curiam decisions: Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, No. 20-1212: Petitioners are partial owners of a multiunit residential building in...more

SCOTUS Will Rule on a New Takings Case

Nossaman LLP on 11/27/2020

The U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to decide whether a California regulation allowing union organizers to access employers’ property is an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment....more

Reclassification of Land From Urban to Agricultural Did Not Result in Unconstitutional Regulatory Taking

Perkins Coie on 6/17/2020

The State of Hawaii Land Use Commission’s reversion of 1,060 acres from a conditional urban land use classification to the prior agricultural use classification was not an unconstitutional taking because the landowner could...more

Property Owners Cannot Remove State Court Eminent Domain Actions to Federal Court

Nossaman LLP on 1/16/2020

Last year, the United States Supreme Court made headlines (at least in our eminent domain world) by issuing a ruling in Knick v. Township of Scott that property owners can bypass the state courts and directly file a Fifth...more

U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Case Requesting Reconsideration of Williamson County’s Unfair and Unworkable State Court...

Miller Starr Regalia on 3/7/2018

On March 5, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Knick v. Township of Scott (Case No. 17-647) to address the requirement, established in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S....more

The Supreme Court - March 5, 2018

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on 3/6/2018

The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions today: U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge L.L.C., No. 15-1509: Respondent Lakeridge filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and sought approval of a “cramdown” plan...more

Supreme Court Considers Zoning Merger Case- How does this apply in Southampton Town?

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on 12/20/2017

The stakes could not be higher; would the property yield one or two waterfront building lots? On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States decided a case that involved the merger of two parcels of property...more

No Boundaries: The Erosion of Private Property Rights by Judicial Deference to Regulatory Overreach

Miller Starr Regalia on 10/5/2017

A fundamental precept of American law is the authority of the government, in the exercise of the police power for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to regulate the conduct of individuals in the...more

Murr v. Wisconsin: Defining the Property Affected by a Regulatory Taking

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC on 7/28/2017

The Supreme Court of the United States recently decided the case Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214 (June 23, 2017), which laid out a new test for determining whether separate parcels of land should be evaluated as a single parcel...more

Supreme Court Develops New Multifactor Balancing Test to Determine What Constitutes a “Larger Parcel” in Regulatory Takings Cases

Nossaman LLP on 7/3/2017

Last week, the United States Supreme Court in Murr v. Wisconsin issued a key regulatory takings decision which creates a new multifactor balancing test to determine whether two adjacent properties with single ownership could...more

U.S. Supreme Court Establishes New Test for Evaluating Property Rights Under the Takings Clause

Holland & Knight LLP on 6/30/2017

In Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, 2017 WL 2694699 (U.S.S.C. June 23, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court, in a majority opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, addressed "one of the critical questions" in the law of regulatory takings:...more

SCOTUS Establishes a New Three-Part Test To Determine the “Whole Parcel” in Regulatory Takings Cases

Locke Lord LLP on 6/30/2017

Property owners who allege a regulatory taking will now need to analyze their holdings against a new, fact-specific, three-factor standard announced by the U.S. Supreme Court to determine what constitutes the owners’ “whole...more

SCOTUS Announces New Multi-Factor Test to Determine the Relevant Parcel in Regulatory Takings Cases

Miller Starr Regalia on 6/30/2017

On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States finally decided Murr v. Wisconsin, __ U.S. __ (2017) (Case No. 15-214), a case that addressed land use regulations that “merged” adjacent parcels (the first of which...more

Murr Decision Makes Takings Law Murkier

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on 6/29/2017

Murr v. Wisconsin (June 23, 2017, Docket No. 15-214) - Why It Matters: The Supreme Court missed an opportunity to bring some clarity to the law of regulatory takings and, instead, made the law more confusing and less...more

Redefining the Denominator: Supreme Court Adopts New Test in Regulatory Taking Case

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP on 6/28/2017

In Murr v. Wisconsin, the US Supreme Court declined to find that a landowner's riverfront property was the subject of a regulatory taking. In a 5-3 decision, the majority adopted a new test for defining the bounds of the...more

The Supreme Court Makes a Mess of Takings Law

Beveridge & Diamond PC on 6/28/2017

On June 23, the Supreme Court finally addressed directly the frequently posed question: When considering the claimed taking of a property interest by government regulation, what is the affected property to be considered? All...more

U.S. Supreme Court: State Law Merging Lots in Common Ownership Not a Regulatory Taking

Holland & Knight LLP on 6/27/2017

In an interesting twist, eight members of the U.S. Supreme Court agreed on June 23, 2017, in the case of Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, that state regulations making two adjoining lots held in common ownership into a single...more

Real Property & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending June 16 & 23, 2017

Carlton Fields on 6/27/2017

Real Property Update - US Supreme Court - Regulatory Taking: owner of parcel A, that took title to adjacent parcel B after regulation restricting use of parcels had been passed, lost grandfather rights for both parcels by...more

U.S. Supreme Court issues 5th Amendment Takings Claim Decision

Saul Ewing LLP on 6/27/2017

On June 23, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated ruling in Murr v. Wisconsin, a takings case that may have important consequences for property owners owning multiple contiguous parcels. The Court held that...more

The Supreme Court - June 23, 2017

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on 6/26/2017

Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Bd., No. 16-399: Petitioner Anthony Perry was a federal employee at the U.S. Census Bureau and in 2011, received notice he would be terminated due to spotty attendance. Perry and the Bureau...more

SCOTUS Rejects Dueling Bright Line Tests to Identify Property at Issue in Regulatory Takings Cases

Clark Hill PLC on 6/26/2017

The Supreme Court of the United States applied a multi-factor test to rule that a regulation prohibiting construction on an undersized lot contiguous to a second lot under common ownership was not a taking. In the broadest...more

Supreme Court Decides Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214.

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on 6/26/2017

On June 23, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, holding that, in determining whether a regulatory taking has occurred under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, courts should...more

Not for the Taking: In Murr v. Wisconsin, the Supreme Court Rules that Two Lots Be Considered as a Whole

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real... on 6/26/2017

On June 23, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court held that there was no compensable taking of Petitioners’ property in Murr v. Wisconsin. Petitioners who own two adjacent lots along a waterfront in Wisconsin were not deprived of all...more

31 Results

View per page

Page: of 2

Supreme Court of the United States › Regulatory Takings

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"