legal Flashcards
In this Supreme Court case a city’s right to zone property at low-density was upheld and the Courts determined the zoning was not a taking.
Agnis v. Cirt of Tiburon (1980)
The “rough proportionality” test was created in this Supreme Court Case where in its establishment the Court overturned an exaction that required dedication of a portion of a floodpain.
Dolan V. City of Tigard (1994)
What was the result of Metromedia Inc. v. City of San Diego (1981) on landuse planning in the U.S.?
Result: The Court found that commerical and noncommercial speech cannot be treated differently. The ordinance banning all off-premises signs was overruled by the Court because it effectively banned noncommercial signs.
The U.S. Supreme Court first approved the regulation and location of land uses in which 1915 case and, what was the Court’s finding?
Hadacheck V. Sebastian (1915) the Supreme Court fond that a zoning ordinance in Los Angeles that prohibited the production of bricks in a specific location did not violate the Equal Protection caluses under the 14th Amendment.
What was the finding in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty (1926) and which clauses of the 14th amendment did it refer to?
Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty (1926) upheld modern zoning as a proper use of police power in which Alfred Bettman filed an influential brief with the Court.
The Court found that the zoning ordinance did not violate the:
1. Due Process and
2. Equal Protection
Clauses of the 14th Amendment.
Which U.S. Supreme Court case established limitations on zoning and used a rational basis test to strike down a zoning ordinance just 2 years after Euclid v. Ambler? And what was the reason given?
Nectow v. City of Cambridge (1928) the reason given was that the ordinance had no valid public purpose and was therefore a violation of the 14th Amendments Due Process clause.
What U.S. Supreme Court case found that the Army Corp of Engineers must determine whether there is a significant nexus between a wetland and a navigable water way?
Rapanos v. United States (2006)
What was the Court’s finding in Pennsylvania Coal Co. vs. Mahon (1922) and what Amendment did the Court case use to define “taking?”
The Court found that if a regulation goes too far it will be recognizedf as a taking. This ruling was the first to define a “taking” under the 5th Amendment.
Which U.S Supreme Court Case found that the New York City Landmark Preservation Law did not constitute as a taking as applied to the Grand Central Terminal ?
Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York (1978)
What was the Court’s finding in First English Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles? (1987)?
The Court found that if a property is unusable for a period of time, then not only can the ordinance be set aside, but the property owner can subject the government to pay for damages.
What U.S. Supreme Court case ruled that the homeowners’ request to rebuild their home did not further the government’s interest in overcoming a perceived psychological barrier to using the beach? And, what Amendment was cited as violated for this case?
Nollan v. California Coastal Council (1987) and the 5th Amendment was cited as being violated as this was a regulatory taking without compensation.
Which Supreme Court case found that there is a taking if there is a total reduction in value after the regulation is in place? And, what was the Court’s finding in this case?
Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1992)
The Court found that Lucas purchased the land prior to the development regulations being put in place, and so the regulation constituted a taking.
What was the Court’s finding in City of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent (1984)?
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; and the Court also found that aesthetics does advance a legitimate state interest.
In which U.S. Supreme Court Case did the the Court uphold aesthetics as a vaild public purpose? And, what else did the Couty also find to be a valid public purpose in this landmark case?
Berman v. Parker (1954) The Court also found that urban renewal is a valid public purpose.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the city’s law prohibiting a window sign was a violaton of free speech under the First Amendment in which case?
City of Ladue v. Gilleo (1994)
