Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Just compensation

Horne v. Department of Agriculture

The U.S. Supreme Court held that a USDA marketing order under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 requiring raisin producers to participate in a raisin reserve program violates the Fifth Amendment's prohibition against...

Horne v. United States Department of Agriculture

The Ninth Circuit, following a reversal and remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, held that a USDA marketing order under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 requiring raisin producers to participate in a raisin reserve...

Lost Tree Village Corp. v. United States

The Federal Claims Court awarded a Florida developer $4 million after finding that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' denial of the developer's §404 permit request to dredge and fill a five-acre plot of land effected a compensable taking...

Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District

The U.S. Supreme Court held that a government's demand for property from a land use permit application must satisfy the "nexus" and "rough proportionality" requirements of Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825,...

Edwards Aquifer Authority v. Day

The Texas Supreme Court held that landowners have an ownership interest in the water beneath their property that cannot be taken for public use without adequate compensation under the Texas Constitution. The Texas courts have long...

Schooner Harbor Ventures, Inc. v. United States

The Federal Circuit reversed a lower court's dismissal of a property owner's claim for just compensation after the FWS required mitigation in connection with its sale of property to the U.S. Navy. A property owner sought to sell some of...

Allegretti & Co. v. Imperial, County of

A court holds that a county did not effect a physical or regulatory taking when it imposed conditions on a landowner's permit to activate a well on its property. The conditional use permit limited the landowner from extracting no more...

Vaizburd v. United States

The Federal Circuit held that the government's deposit of sand on landowners' property amounted to a physical taking of a permanent easement but that the landowners failed to establish any decline in the fair market value of their...

520 E. 81st St. Assocs. v. State

The court holds that the proper method of determining just compensation for the state's temporary regulatory taking of 39 apartments requires not only the sale value of the property, but also interest on the sale value. In 1985, the...

Schneider v. San Diego, County of

The court affirms a district court holding that where compensation was paid long after a taking, an individual was entitled to prejudgment interest, but remands the case for a redetermination of the amount of interest to be awarded....