 | | FEATURE ARTICLE |
August 2005
|
To read this entire item of approximately 4400 words online now in PDF format:
Click here to read this item if you are an existing subscriber to this publication.
Click here to purchase the full text of this item to read now (price: $25).
To subscribe to this publication and immediately access all its archives including this item, select the relevant publication under 'Catalogue' in the left-hand column
PLEASE NOTE: to read PDFs on www.argento.com you must be using Version 5 of Acrobat Reader or Adobe Reader. If you have an earlier version you can download the latest free of charge by clicking here
|
Thrice More into the Breach: The U.S. Supreme Court Takes on Takings in Kelo, San Remo and Lingle
In a trio of decisions, in what we now know was most likely Justice O’Connor’s final term, the United States Supreme Court ventured boldly into the jurisprudential thicket of takings law. In the process, it cleared up some doctrinal murk, created some controversy, and generally empowered the government to more aggressively regulate and condemn private property.
The information contained on this page is presented for your convenience as news and analysis. It is not intended as legal advice, nor should it be relied upon as such. Please consult an attorney for advice in your case or matter
|
Read related items on:
 Topics) Eminent Domain) Economic Development
Topics) Eminent Domain) Public Purposes
Topics) Land Use) Eminent Domain
Topics) Land Use) Takings
Topics) Litigation) Ripeness Doctrine
Topics) Litigation) Takings
Topics) Takings Clause) Takings Clause
Topics) United States Constitution) Takings Clause
United States Supreme Court
Kelo v. City of New London
Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc
San Remo Hotel, L.P., et. al, v. City and County of San Francisco, et al.
|
