Law

Question 1

Easement by Necessity

Answer 1

Used to allow a landlocked landowner to access public right-of-way over another’s private land when no other relief is possible.

Question 2

First Amendment Cases

Answer 2

Freedom of speech, religion, assembly
Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc (1974)
Metromedia, Inc v. City of San Diego (1981)
LA City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent (1984)
City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters, Inc. (1986)
City of Laude v. Gilleo (1994)
Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015)

Question 3

Fifth Amendment Cases

Answer 3

Just compensation for takings
Berman v. Parker (1954)
Penn Central v. City of New York (19780
Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987)
Dolan v. Tigard (1994)
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe
Kelo v. City of New London (2005)

Question 4

Fourteenth Amendment Cases

Answer 4

Village of Belle Terre v. Boaraas (1974)
Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Mount Laurel (1975; 1983)

Question 5

Zoning Law

Answer 5

Welch v. Swasey (1909)
Hadacheck v. Sebastian (1915)
Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. (1926)

Question 6

Growth Management Law

Answer 6

Construction Industry Association of Sanoma County v. City of Petaluma (1971)
Golden v. Ramapo (1972)
Associated Homebuilders v. City of Livermore (1976)

Question 7

Village of Belle Terre v. Boaraas

Answer 7

Fourteenth Amendment

Within a City’s police power to regulate the number of unrelated people who live together (definition “family”)

Question 8

City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters, Inc

Answer 8

First Amendment

City can administer time, place, and manner restriction based on the secondary effects of a proposed use.

Question 9

Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Mount Laurel

Answer 9

Fourteenth Amendment

Towns must using zoning power to delegate areas for affordable housing.

Question 10

Construction Industry v. Petaluma

Answer 10

Growth management law (14th Amend.)

City’s can restrict growth (provide growth caps) in the interest of preserving the public welfare.

Question 11

Golden v. Ramapo

Answer 11

Growth management (14th Amendment.)
City’s can condition development (and stall development) based on the availability of infrastructure and services.

NOT a Supreme Court case

Question 12

Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon

Answer 12

5th Amendment
Court ruled that if a regulation goes too far, it will become a taking. First case to define “taking”.

Question 13

Penn Central v. New York

Answer 13

5th Amendment
Regulations that preserve aesthetics are a legitimate use of police power.

Question 14

Nollan v. California Coastal Commission

Answer 14

5th Amendment
Regulatory taking without compensation.
Needs to be a clear “nexus” between a proposed condition and the benefit to the public.

Question 15

Dolan v. City of Tigard

Answer 15

5th Amendment
Court ruled that requiring Dolan to dedicate an easement without clear purpose for the easement is a taking.
What the City asks for (takes) should be “roughly proportional” to the nature/extent of the problem.

Question 16

Tahoe Sierra v. Tahoe Regional Agency

Answer 16

5th Amendment
Court found that the moratoria on development did not constitute a taking

Question 17

Lingle v. Chevron

Answer 17

5th Amendment
Court found that the takings clause should be based on the severity of the burden that the regulation imposes upon property rights and not whether the effect of the regulation is to “substantially advance” governmental interest.

Question 18

Metromedia v. City of San Diego

Answer 18

1st Amendment

Metromedia v City of San Diego was found to violate the first amendment’s freedom of speech. In this case, the City of San Diego banned most outdoor advertising signs to improve aesthetics and prevent a distraction for motorists. The City only permitted on-site signs, not off-site signs. This Court found that this did violate the first and fourteenth amendment finding that this ban discriminated against noncommercial speech. In this case, they found that the ordinance provided a greater degree of freedom of speech protection to commercial speech.

Question 19

What did the Indian Reorganization Act provide for?

Answer 19

Organization of Native Americans living on reservations and Adoption of constitutions by Native Americans living on reservations.

The 1934 Act allowed Native Americans to adopt a constitution and organize for their common welfare.

Question 20

Agins v. City of Tiburon

Answer 20

5th Amendment

Court held that the test for determining whether a zoning ordinance or governmental regulation will be considered a taking is whether such action “substantially advances” a legitimate state interest

Question 21

Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc.

Answer 21

1st Amendment

Court upheld zoning requirement of 1,000ft separation between adult uses; City’s can regulate time, place, and manner.

Question 22

LA City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent

Answer 22

1st Amendment

The Court found that the regulation of signs was valid for aesthetic reasons as long as the ordinance did not regulate the content of the sign. The Court found that aesthetics does advance a legitimate state interest.

Question 23

City of Ladue v. Gilleo

Answer 23

1st Amendment

City cannot prohibit all signs on residential property.

Question 24

Reed v. Town of Gilbert

Answer 24

1st Amendment

Court found that sign ordinances must be content-neutral.