News & Analysis as of

Takings Clause Supreme Court of the United States Constitutional Challenges

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Supreme Court Impact Fee Decision Creates Opportunities for Developers and Property Owners

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that may significantly affect how development impact fees are assessed in California. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the Court unanimously held that...more

Stoel Rives -  Ahead of Schedule

The United States Supreme Court Determines There Is No Distinction Between Legislative and Administrative Takings

In a typical permitting process, the local government may place certain conditions on issuing a building permit to further a legitimate public purpose.  While the local government has “substantial authority to regulate land...more

Downey Brand LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Legislatively-imposed Permit Conditions Must Satisfy the ‘Essential Nexus’ and ‘Rough...

Downey Brand LLP on

In a highly-anticipated case revolving around development impact fees, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, 144 S.Ct. 893 (2024) that legislatively-imposed conditions on building permits...more

Cozen O'Connor

U.S. Supreme Court Revisits the Right of Local Government to Exact Permit Conditions from Developers

Cozen O'Connor on

The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has again rejected a state's narrow interpretation of the constitutional limits on government's ability to impose development conditions. A unanimous SCOTUS ruled on April 12 in favor of the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

What the Sheetz: Where California Development Impact Fees Stand Following Recent Supreme Court Decision

Undoubtedly, development impact fees (DIFs) can make or break the pro forma of any development project. Until this month, developers hoping to challenge the assessment of project-related DIFs were often limited in the causes...more

Rosenberg Martin Greenberg LLP

Supreme Court Leaves the Sheetz Out In Takings Case

When the government wants to take private property for a public project, it must compensate the owner at fair market value. The just compensation concept comes from the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which provides: “nor...more

Nossaman LLP

State Inverse Condemnation Remedy Sufficient To Vindicate Constitutional Rights

Nossaman LLP on

Dodge, duck, dip, dive, and… dodge.  An interesting case from the United States Supreme Court yesterday.  Interesting because of what it says, and interesting because of what it very explicitly declined to say....more

Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti PC

U.S. Supreme Court: Legislative Impact Fees Can Be Unconstitutional Exactions Too

Last week, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, in which the Court held that for the purpose of a takings claim there is no distinction in whether permit conditions...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Rules Legislative Permit Conditions Not Exempt From Nollan/Dolan Scrutiny

Perkins Coie on

In a dispute over a traffic impact fee imposed on a residential building permit by El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the long-standing position of California and other state courts that the Takings...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

U.S. Supreme Court: Takings Clause Applies to Impact Fees on New Development

The Sheetz v. County of El Dorado decision will create uncertainty in California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and many other states as cities, counties, developers and property owners reexamine whether existing impact fee...more

Venable LLP

SCOTUS Rules for Landowner in Fifth Amendment Takings Clause Case

Venable LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) held that the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land‑use permit conditions. Building permit...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Sets Stage for Widespread Challenges to Real Estate Development Impact Fees

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 12, 2024, that the "Takings Clause" enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies equally to legislative and administratively imposed land use permitting fees. Since...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Property Owner in Exaction Takings Case

Ballard Spahr LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court last week unanimously held that the Takings Clause of the Constitution prevents legislatures, as well as administrative agencies, from imposing unconstitutional conditions on land-use permits....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Supreme Court Concludes the Takings Clause Applies to Legislative Fee Enactments

On April 12, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sheetz v. Cnty. Of El Dorado, California, 22-1074 (U.S. Apr. 12, 2024) and unanimously held that legislative actions can still be unconstitutional exactions...more

Allen Matkins

Supreme Court Narrows Local Governments’ Ability to Impose Impact Fees – A Potential Sea Change for California

Allen Matkins on

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated ruling in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, U.S. No. 22-1074 (petition for certiorari granted 9/29/23) (Sheetz). The case concerned the...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - April 12, 2024

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions today: Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, No. 22-1074: This case involves the “unconstitutional conditions doctrine,” set forth in Nollan v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n,...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Unanimity Among Justices Rules the Day - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

Some commentators claim there are bitter divisions among the Justices, roiling the Court and its processes. Many of the same commentators were critical of the Court’s decision holding that former President Trump was not...more

Saiber LLC

SCOTUS Asked to Clarify the Scope of Constitutional Challenges to Land Use Permit Conditions

Saiber LLC on

In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, when George Sheetz sought a building permit to construct a single-family residence, the County of El Dorado agreed to issue the permit with one important condition: he had to pay...more

Epstein Becker & Green

A Big Day for the Little Guy – SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

With essential unanimity, though with an array of concurrences in one of them, the Supreme Court ruled against government parties in three cases, two of them in favor of homeowners, and in property rights and environmental...more

Whitman Legal Solutions, LLC

Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid – A Labor Law Case That Could Affect Eviction Moratoriums

Like music, real estate isn’t just one thing. It’s a combination of many rights. This article discusses the bundle of rights that comprise real estate, how the United States Supreme Court’s June 23, 2021 ruling Cedar Point...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - June 23, 2021

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Collins v. Yellen, No. 19-422: The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (“Recovery Act”), 12 U.S.C. §4501 et seq., was passed in response to concerns that Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s financial condition as a result of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

SCOTUS to Consider Whether California Unconstitutionally “Takes” Private Property When It Compels Agricultural Employers to Grant...

When it comes to whether unions have a right to enter an employer’s premises over the employer’s objections, California’s law is the polar opposite of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the law in most other states....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Arthrex Files Certiorari Petition in Arthrex case

Arthrex recently filed a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew Inc. (a case related to Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., which has also the subject of petitions from the U.S. government...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Takes Pass on Considering IPR Constitutionality

There is little rhyme nor reason in the cases the Supreme Court decides to review. But the Court has patterns in its case selection that do (to some degree) probe what the Justices think are important questions. One pattern...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Unprecedented: COVID-19 Litigation Trends - Issue 6

This sixth edition of Unprecedented, our weekly update on COVID-19 litigation, sees us reporting on many of the same types of cases. Consumers continue to seek refunds for goods and services that have been disrupted by the...more

35 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

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

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide