News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States Dolan v City of Tigard

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Supreme Court Impact Fee Decision Creates Opportunities for Developers and Property Owners

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that may significantly affect how development impact fees are assessed in California. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the Court unanimously held that...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

Supreme Court’s Sheetz decision casts doubt on validity of Massachusetts inclusionary zoning regulations

Pierce Atwood LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado may have a profound impact on inclusionary zoning ordinances and bylaws in Massachusetts. I suspect few of those regulations – if challenged – will...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Permit Conditions and Impact Fees Subject of Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decision

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court in April 2024 issued a unanimous decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California (144 S. Ct. 893), concluding that the "Takings Clause" in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies to...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

US Supreme Court Decision Invites Scrutiny of Legislatively Imposed Impact Fees

Latham & Watkins LLP on

The unanimous opinion holds that development impact fees established through the legislative process are subject to constitutional scrutiny as potential regulatory takings. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Rules Legislatively Adopted Exactions Not Exempt From Nollan/Dolan Scrutiny 

Perkins Coie on

In a dispute over a traffic impact fee imposed on a residential building permit by El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the long-standing position of California and other state courts that the Takings...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Rules Legislative Permit Conditions Not Exempt From Nollan/Dolan Scrutiny

Perkins Coie on

In a dispute over a traffic impact fee imposed on a residential building permit by El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the long-standing position of California and other state courts that the Takings...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Sets Stage for Widespread Challenges to Real Estate Development Impact Fees

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 12, 2024, that the "Takings Clause" enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies equally to legislative and administratively imposed land use permitting fees. Since...more

Venable LLP

Supreme Court Considers Whether to Expand Constitutional Takings to Legislative Development Fees

Venable LLP on

When George Sheetz planned to build an 1800-square-foot manufactured home on his California property, he could hardly have thought his routine permit request would end up at the U.S. Supreme Court. But when the County of El...more

Saiber LLC

SCOTUS Asked to Clarify the Scope of Constitutional Challenges to Land Use Permit Conditions

Saiber LLC on

In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, when George Sheetz sought a building permit to construct a single-family residence, the County of El Dorado agreed to issue the permit with one important condition: he had to pay...more

Bilzin Sumberg

U.S. Supreme Court Decision On Land-Use Exactions Impacts Developers, Government

Bilzin Sumberg on

If you have ever filed a zoning application and been subjected at the public hearing to a version of the game show “Let’s Make a Deal,” you may find of interest a June 2013 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that addresses...more

Nossaman LLP

Government Need Not Satisfy Nexus and Proportionality Tests if Dedication Requirement Does Not Otherwise Constitute a Taking

Nossaman LLP on

Landowners routinely have to give up something in return for a government agency’s granting a discretionary permit. However, there are limits, as the government agency cannot typically demand conditions that are not...more

Allen Matkins

Requiring Landowners To Dedicate An "Overflight" Easement Is Not A Taking, Even When All An Owner Seeks Is A Minor Building Permit

Allen Matkins on

The United States Supreme Court decisions in Nollan and Dolan provide landowners with a useful tool for seeking compensation when government agencies use their land use authority to exact valuable property rights and other...more

K&L Gates LLP

Koontz: The latest chapter in land use permitting and takings

K&L Gates LLP on

In a landmark environmental case, the United States Supreme Court expanded the scope of potential governmental liability for takings. In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist, 133 S. Ct. 2586 (2013), the Court held that...more

Miller Starr Regalia

Will Koontz Mean Big Changes or Business as Usual for Real Estate Development in California

Miller Starr Regalia on

On June 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court release its decision in Koontz v. St. John's River Water Managment District. Koontz has been called the most significant takings case since Kelo v. City of New London and has been...more

Holland & Knight LLP

California Supreme Court to Review Inclusionary Housing Requirements

Holland & Knight LLP on

On September 11, 2013, the California Supreme Court granted the California Building Industry Association's (CBIA) petition for review challenging a San Jose ordinance that imposed "inclusionary" housing obligations on housing...more

Nossaman LLP

California Supreme Court Set to Hear First Post-Koontz Takings Case

Nossaman LLP on

As reported by our colleague Robert Thomas on inversecondemnation.com, the California Supreme Court granted the California Building Industry Association's (CBIA) petition for review in California Building Industry Association...more

Snell & Wilmer

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Latest Attempt to Differentiate a Fair Quid Pro Quo in the Developer’s Permitting Process From an...

Snell & Wilmer on

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued an important decision in an attempt to add clarity and help government land use planners understand the difference between reasonable requests and unreasonable demands rising to the level of...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Landowner Seeking To Develop Property

On June 25, 2013, the United States Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District rendered a decision that protects the rights of property owners when seeking construction permits to develop their...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Supreme Court Gets It Right On Takings - And Wrong - A View from "Inside the Curtilage": The Property Owner's Perspective

In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, the Supreme Court cleared up two important, nagging issues with wide applicability and importance to property owners across the country. First, the 5-member majority,...more

Allen Matkins

The Koontz Decision: Limits Conditions a Government can Impose on Developers

Allen Matkins on

The extent to which governmental authorities may condition land use permits on exactions and concessions from land use permit applicants has received extraordinary attention from the United States Supreme Court in recent...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

US Supreme Court Protects Landowners from "Extortionate" Demands by the Government in Land-Use Permitting Decisions, Including...

In a 5-4 decision authored by Justice Alito, and joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy, the US Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District broadened the protections...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Supreme Court Ruling May Lead to More Landowner Challenges of Land Use Regulations, Fees

Ballard Spahr LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in a long-running land use case holding that “extortionate demands” by the local government entity constituted illegal interference with a property owner/developer’s right to...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Extort Me Not: Supreme Court Expands Protections for Permit Applicants Under the Takings Clause

The high court’s decision in Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District extends the landmark decisions in Nollan and Dolan, which set standards on when an agency can condition a land use permit on the relinquishment...more

Holland & Knight LLP

A Victory for Property Rights: U.S. Supreme Court Rules for Developers Seeking Permit Approvals

Holland & Knight LLP on

On June 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down arguably one of the most influential Takings Clause decisions since the Kelo v. City of New London1 ruling in 2005. In a 5-4 decision in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

The 2013 U.S. Supreme Court Takings Trilogy

Pierce Atwood LLP on

It’s the last week of the U.S. Supreme Court’s term, so the big 5-4 decisions are out. Tuesday the big decision was Koontz v. St. Johns River, a takings case. This completes the trilogy of takings cases in front of the...more

32 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide