|
Top Cases Page 3 0£4
<br />
<br /> Held chat an',/ physical occupation is a taking, no matter how de minimis.
<br />
<br /> State law thai: required landlords to permit installation of cable te!evisien ,Facilities on their
<br /> property constituted a taking because it was a phys cai invasion of permanent duration.
<br />
<br /> 28. Sou~:hern Burlington Coune'./ NAACP v. Township of MC. Laurel (H~, 456 A.2d 390 (N.J.
<br /> ~g83)
<br /> Crea~ed ~he model ~air housing remedy ~or exclusionary zoning.
<br />
<br />in a decision consoiidaUng six exclusionary zoning cases, ~he cour~ affirmed and refined ~he
<br />sta~e's cons~i~u~ionai requirement ~ha~ municipalities mus~ provide ~heir fair share of !ow-
<br />and moderate-income housing in their regions and esta~iished remedies ~o accomplish ~his
<br />objective bV means of three judges who are given resaonsibiiity ~or ruling on exclusionac,/
<br />zoning cases.
<br />
<br />19. ~I~ Wiitiamson C:,uni:y P.e~ionai Planning Commission /. H~mii~on Sank, 473 U.S. 172
<br />(~98s)
<br />Defined ~e ripeness doctrine ~or judicial review of Cakings claims,
<br />
<br />No final decision for judicial review has been made and a claim of a ~aKing withou~ just
<br />
<br /> . wn~,~ a property owner fails ~o seek ~h~ possible relief of
<br />compensation is premature ' ' ~
<br />variance and condemnation procedures.
<br />
<br />20. ;~ First ~nmlish_. ~ ~,~.j~.~., ~ ........ ~: ..... ,Ph~ra~... Church of Giendaie v. Los Angeles C~unCy,
<br />U,S. 30~ (Z987)
<br />Ailowed damages (as opposed ~o invalidation) as a remedy flor regulatory ~skings,
<br />
<br />Just compensaOon clause of Fifth Amendment requiFeS compensation for temporary :akings
<br />which occur as a reSUi~ Of reguia(lons uitima~eiy invaiidaced n
<br />
<br />21. No!'.an v. C~difornia Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987)
<br />Crea~ed abe "essential nexus" CaKings Cesc flor conditioning development approvals on
<br />dedications a nd exac2ons.
<br />
<br />Requiring ~he conveyance ~o ~he public of an easement For !a~er~l beach access as a
<br />condition for a permi~ ~o replace a one-slot,/ beach house ,,~ith a two-story residence and a
<br />~vvo-car garage is a caking without jus[ compensation because it is untainted ~o the public
<br />interest in protecting Che pubiic access co ¢he aeach.
<br />
<br />22. :i: i,,,-~ ./ ...., ~,,~, _~
<br /> ..... <_~a ..... I Council, q0q U.S. ~003 (1992)
<br />Defined categorical regutaEory ~akings and an exception for regulations rooted
<br />background prino, pies of law.
<br />
<br />Compensation [o be paid ~o ianaowners when regula0ons deprive ~hem of ail economically
<br />beneficial land use unless uses are disallowed by bile or by state law background prinopies
<br />of private and public nuisances.
<br />
<br />~.~ :~ Ooian ,l. Ci~'/ of Timard, q~,~_ U.S. ~" (i994)
<br />Extendea Noilan's "essential nexus" :es~ [o require 'rough proportionaiit'/" boO, eon
<br />deveioomenC impact and condibons.
<br />
<br />Permit condition requiring land dedication for pedesZrian/bike path is unconstitutional
<br />~aking when dW has not made individualized showing Lhat dedication would "roughly
<br />orooortiona[ei,/" lessen ~raffic ~ ~ ~' .
<br />. , ~e,,~,.ac_a b,/ proposed new deveiooment.
<br />
<br />2~. ~;~.'~;c,~tt: /. S~e~: 'icme :::'nafi, xer cf 2o ~mun.z'.e~ ~or a Grea~ Ore.uon, 5 ~5 U.S. 687
<br />AppiieC ~he ~ndangered Species Ac: ~o !andue,~,oprnen~. ~ ,'~
<br />
<br />q~--=~arv of [nCer~cr's q~Finibon ~f "harm' ~o ._..d~na .... spec:es
<br />.... .. ~n ~ .~=~ . .{prcnibited bV
<br />Endangerea Species A,:: of
<br /> . .... ~ is ,/aiid when defined as "5igniF[con( habitat modific3[ion
<br />or :~egradadon where ie ac~uady ~iiis OF injures ,viidlife."
<br />
<br />302 (2002
<br />
<br />118
<br />
<br />
<br />
|