Tag: Inverse Condemnation and Takings

Requiring dedication of overflight easement as condition to issuance of building permits does not constitute an unconstitutional exaction

 A recent California Court of Appeal decision considered the argument that a county requiring property owners to dedicate an overflight easement as a condition to issuance of a building permit was an unconstitutional exaction. The court concluded that the owners could not establish a taking because they were unable to show that the government simply … Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Monetary Exactions are Subject to Nexus and Rough Proportionality Requirements

In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court expanded the reach of the requirement that there be a “nexus” and “rough proportionality” between the impacts of a proposed development and governmental conditions imposed on the development.  Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, 570 U.S. ___ (2013). The Court held that these requirements … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rules Temporary Flooding May Give Rise To Takings Claim

In an important constitutional decision, the Supreme Court made clear there is no “blanket” rule prohibiting a takings cause of action for government-induced flooding that is only temporary.  The Court therefore reversed the Federal Circuit, which had decided such flooding must be “permanent or inevitably recurring” to give rise to a viable takings claim.  Arkansas … Continue Reading
LexBlog