Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

Plotkin v. Washington County

The court holds that a state land use board erred when it failed to affirm a county's preliminary approval of a residential subdivision in an area containing wetlands and designated as a wildlife habitat. The board rejected the county's argument that the wetlands at issue were not subject to the cou...

Palm Beach Isles Assocs. v. United States

The court holds that summary judgment was improvidently granted in favor of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in a suit brought by property owners who claimed that the Corps' refusal to grant the owners a Clean Water Act (CWA) §404 dredge and fill permit for 50 acres of submerged lands constituted a...

Green Ridge, City of v. Kreisel

The court holds that a trial court incorrectly concluded that a city ordinance regulating junkyards was a zoning ordinance subject to notice-and-hearing requirements. A junkyard owner who had been cited for several violations of the ordinance claimed that the ordinance was inapplicable because it wa...

Huish Detergents, Inc. v. Warren County, Ky.

The court holds that a lower court improperly dismissed a laundry detergent manufacturer's claim that an exclusive franchise agreement between a county and a solid waste handler violated the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement gave the waste handler the exclusive right to collect and process...

Leland v. Moran

The court grants in part and denies in part a New York municipal village's motion to dismiss property owners' negligence and Fourteenth Amendment due process claims against the village for failure to address an unlicensed solid waste management facility's violations of the municipal zoning code. The...

L.C. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln County

The court holds that a county in Missouri can regulate the location of solid waste facilities. A development company challenged a county regulation that prohibits the location of a sanitary landfill within one-quarter mile of any occupied dwelling. A trial court denied the company's motion for summa...

Adams Outdoor Adver. v. E. Lansing, City of

The court holds that a municipal regulation prohibiting billboards on rooftops did not effect a taking of an outdoor advertiser's interest in its rooftop signs. The regulation, enacted in 1975, prohibited rooftop billboards after 1987. The advertiser renewed its leases for rooftop billboards with se...

<i>Kelo</i>'s Legacy

Editors' Summary: Rather than signaling the death of private property rights, as media and the public initially feared, the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London ushered in an era of increased state and federal protection for private property. In this Article, Daniel H. Cole examines Kelo's repercussions for urban redevelopment. He begins with a description of the case, and then examines the resulting backlash from the media and public opinion, which decried the decision as unduly expanding eminent domain powers.