williamson
planning
hamilton
bank
argued
february
decided
june
required
tennessee
law
respondent
predecessor
interest
land
developer
obtained
petitioner
planning
commission
approval
preliminary
plat
development
tract
tract
developed
accord
requirements
county
zoning
ordinance
cluster
development
residential
areas
commission
implementing
regulations
county
zoning
ordinance
changed
reduce
allowable
density
dwelling
units
commission
continued
apply
ordinance
regulations
developer
tract
however
commission
decided
development
tract
governed
ordinance
regulations
effect
commission
thereafter
disapproved
plats
proposing
development
remainder
tract
various
grounds
including
failure
comply
current
density
requirements
respondent
filed
suit
commission
members
staff
also
petitioners
federal
district
pursuant
alleging
commission
taken
property
without
compensation
refusing
approve
proposed
development
jury
found
respondent
denied
economically
viable
use
property
violation
compensation
clause
fifth
amendment
awarded
damages
temporary
taking
respondent
property
district
entered
injunction
requiring
commission
apply
ordinance
regulations
project
granted
judgment
notwithstanding
jury
verdict
commission
taking
claim
concluding
temporary
deprivation
economic
benefit
respondent
property
matter
law
constitute
taking
appeals
reversed
holding
application
government
regulations
affecting
owner
use
property
may
constitute
taking
evidence
supported
jury
finding
property
economically
feasible
use
time
commission
refusal
approve
plat
jury
verdict
held
even
assuming
arguendo
government
regulation
may
effect
taking
fifth
amendment
requires
compensation
assuming
fifth
amendment
requires
payment
money
damages
compensate
taking
jury
verdict
case
upheld
respondent
claim
premature
respondent
yet
obtained
final
decision
regarding
application
ordinance
regulations
property
utilized
procedures
tennessee
provides
obtaining
compensation
claim
therefore
ripe
pp
although
respondent
plan
developing
property
rejected
seek
variances
allowed
develop
property
according
proposed
plat
cf
hodel
virginia
surface
mining
reclamation
record
support
respondent
claim
commission
denial
approval
respondent
plat
equivalent
denial
variances
thus
respondent
yet
obtained
final
decision
regarding
allowed
develop
property
respondent
contention
required
seek
variances
suit
predicated
upon
without
merit
requirement
plaintiff
exhaust
administrative
remedies
bringing
action
question
whether
administrative
remedies
must
exhausted
conceptually
distinct
question
whether
administrative
action
must
final
judicially
reviewable
pp
fifth
amendment
require
compensation
paid
advance
contemporaneously
taking
state
provides
adequate
procedure
seeking
compensation
property
owner
claim
violation
compensation
clause
used
procedure
denied
compensation
tennessee
law
property
owner
may
bring
inverse
condemnation
action
obtain
compensation
alleged
taking
property
certain
circumstances
respondent
shown
inverse
condemnation
procedure
unavailable
inadequate
utilized
procedure
taking
claim
premature
pp
respondent
claim
also
premature
viewed
theory
government
regulation
goes
far
effect
physical
taking
must
viewed
fifth
amendment
taking
invalid
exercise
police
power
violative
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
resolution
due
process
question
depends
significant
part
upon
analysis
effect
commission
application
ordinance
regulations
value
respondent
property
profit
expectations
effect
measured
final
decision
made
regulations
applied
respondent
property
decision
made
time
respondent
filed
action
respondent
failed
apply
variances
regulations
pp
blackmun
delivered
opinion
burger
brennan
marshall
rehnquist
joined
brennan
filed
concurring
opinion
marshall
joined
post
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
post
white
filed
dissenting
statement
post
powell
took
part
decision
case
robert
estes
argued
cause
petitioners
brief
milton
sweeney
edwin
kneedler
argued
cause
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
brief
solicitor
general
lee
assistant
attorney
general
habicht
deputy
solicitor
general
claiborne
david
shilton
nebel
argued
cause
respondent
brief
gus
bauman
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
state
california
ex
rel
john
van
de
kamp
attorney
general
california
et
al
van
de
kamp
pro
se
gregory
taylor
theodora
berger
assistant
attorneys
general
california
richard
jacobs
craig
thompson
richard
frank
norman
gorsuch
attorney
general
alaska
jim
smith
attorney
general
florida
thomas
miller
attorney
general
iowa
francis
bellotti
attorney
general
massachusetts
hubert
humphrey
iii
attorney
general
minnesota
paul
douglas
attorney
general
nebraska
brian
mckay
attorney
general
nevada
george
postrozny
deputy
attorney
general
gregory
smith
attorney
general
new
hampshire
travis
medlock
attorney
general
south
carolina
jim
mattox
attorney
general
texas
rufus
edmisten
attorney
general
north
carolina
michael
turpen
attorney
general
oklahoma
robert
mcdonald
first
assistant
attorney
general
mark
meierhenry
attorney
general
south
dakota
david
wilkinson
attorney
general
utah
dallis
jensen
solicitor
general
john
easton
attorney
general
vermont
bronson
la
follette
attorney
general
wisconsin
archie
mcclintock
attorney
general
wyoming
aviata
attorney
general
american
samoa
national
association
counties
et
al
lawrence
velvel
joyce
holmes
benjamin
city
new
york
frederick
schwarz
leonard
koerner
city
petersburg
florida
charles
siemon
wendy
larsen
michael
davis
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
american
college
real
estate
lawyers
edward
cutler
eugene
morris
john
trevaskis
california
building
industry
association
gideon
kanner
national
apartment
association
jon
smock
wilbur
haines
iii
pacific
legal
foundation
ronald
zumbrun
robert
best
morris
thurston
robert
break
john
fellows
iii
filed
brief
irvine
amicus
curiae
justice
blackmun
delivered
opinion
respondent
owner
tract
land
developing
residential
subdivision
sued
petitioners
williamson
county
tennessee
regional
planning
commission
members
staff
district
alleging
petitioners
application
various
zoning
laws
regulations
respondent
property
amounted
taking
property
trial
jury
agreed
awarded
respondent
compensation
taking
although
jury
verdict
rejected
district
granted
judgment
notwithstanding
verdict
petitioners
verdict
reinstated
appeal
petitioners
amici
urge
overturn
jury
award
ground
temporary
regulatory
interference
investor
profit
expectation
constitute
taking
within
meaning
compensation
clause
fifth
amendment
alternatively
ground
even
interference
constitute
taking
compensation
clause
require
money
damages
recompense
reach
contentions
examine
procedural
posture
respondent
claim
tennessee
law
responsibility
planning
divided
legislative
body
state
counties
regional
municipal
planning
commissions
county
legislative
body
responsible
zoning
ordinances
regulate
uses
particular
land
buildings
may
put
control
density
population
location
dimensions
buildings
code
ann
planning
commissions
responsible
specific
regulations
governing
subdivision
land
within
region
municipality
residential
development
enforcement
zoning
ordinances
subdivision
regulations
accomplished
part
requirement
planning
commission
approve
plat
subdivision
plat
may
recorded
supp
pursuant
williamson
county
quarterly
county
legislative
body
adopted
zoning
ordinance
allowed
cluster
development
residential
areas
cluster
zoning
size
width
individual
residential
lots
development
may
reduced
provided
overall
density
entire
tract
remains
constant
provided
area
equivalent
total
areas
thus
saved
individual
lot
pooled
retained
common
open
space
williams
american
land
planning
law
pp
required
respondent
developer
submitted
preliminary
plat
cluster
development
tract
temple
hills
country
club
estates
temple
hills
williamson
county
regional
planning
commission
approval
time
county
zoning
ordinance
commission
subdivision
regulations
required
developers
seek
review
approval
subdivision
plats
two
steps
developer
first
submit
approval
preliminary
plat
initial
sketch
plan
indicating
among
things
boundaries
acreage
site
number
dwelling
units
basic
design
location
existing
proposed
roads
structures
lots
utility
layouts
open
space
contour
land
app
pp
ca
approved
preliminary
plat
served
basis
preparation
final
plat
commission
regulations
however
approval
preliminary
plat
constitute
acceptance
final
plat
approval
preliminary
plat
lapsed
final
plat
submitted
within
one
year
date
approval
unless
commission
granted
extension
time
unless
approval
preliminary
plat
renewed
ibid
final
plat
official
authenticated
document
recorded
required
conform
substantially
preliminary
plat
addition
include
details
lines
streets
lots
boundaries
building
setbacks
may
commission
approved
developer
preliminary
plat
temple
hills
app
plat
indicated
development
include
acres
acres
open
space
primarily
form
golf
course
notation
plat
indicated
number
allowable
dwelling
units
total
development
lot
lines
drawn
units
areas
remaining
units
placed
left
blank
bore
notation
parcel
developed
approved
planning
commission
plat
also
contained
disclaimer
parcels
note
parcel
developed
approved
planning
commission
part
plat
included
gross
area
ibid
density
allowable
dwelling
units
calculated
multiplying
number
acres
number
units
allowed
per
acre
although
zoning
regulations
effect
required
density
calculated
basis
total
acreage
less
fifty
percent
land
lying
flood
plain
less
fifty
percent
land
lying
slope
grade
excess
percent
ca
app
deduction
made
acres
land
tr
upon
approval
preliminary
plat
developer
conveyed
county
permanent
open
space
easement
golf
course
began
building
roads
installing
utility
lines
project
app
developer
spent
approximately
million
building
golf
course
another
installing
sewer
water
facilities
defendant
ex
housing
construction
begin
particular
section
final
plat
section
submitted
approval
several
sections
containing
total
units
given
final
approval
app
preliminary
plat
well
reapproved
four
times
period
county
changed
zoning
ordinance
require
calculations
allowable
density
exclude
total
acreage
account
roads
utilities
ca
app
addition
number
allowable
units
changed
one
per
acre
per
acre
allowed
tr
commission
continued
apply
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
effect
temple
hills
however
reapproved
preliminary
plat
august
commission
reversed
position
decided
plats
submitted
renewal
evaluated
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
effect
renewal
sought
app
commission
renewed
temple
hills
plat
ordinances
regulations
effect
time
january
commission
asked
developer
submit
revised
preliminary
plat
sought
final
approval
remaining
sections
subdivision
commission
reasoned
necessary
original
preliminary
plat
contained
number
surveying
errors
land
available
subdivision
decreased
inasmuch
state
condemned
part
land
parkway
areas
marked
reserved
future
development
never
platted
plaintiff
exs
tr
special
committee
temple
hills
committee
appointed
work
developer
revision
preliminary
plat
plaintiff
ex
tr
developer
submitted
revised
preliminary
plat
approval
october
upon
review
commission
staff
temple
hills
committee
noted
several
problems
revised
plat
app
first
allowable
density
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
effect
units
rather
units
claimed
preliminary
plat
approved
difference
reflected
decrease
acres
parkway
decrease
acres
deduction
roads
exclusion
acres
land
lying
slopes
exceeding
grade
second
two
roads
become
necessary
land
taken
parkway
exceeded
maximum
length
allowed
roads
subdivision
regulations
effect
third
approximately
feet
road
grades
excess
maximum
allowed
county
road
regulations
fourth
preliminary
plat
placed
units
land
grades
excess
thus
considered
undevelopable
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
fifth
developer
fulfilled
obligations
regarding
construction
maintenance
main
access
road
sixth
inadequate
fire
protection
services
area
well
inadequate
open
space
children
recreational
activities
finally
lots
proposed
preliminary
plat
road
frontage
minimum
required
subdivision
regulations
effect
temple
hills
committee
recommended
commission
grant
waiver
regulations
regarding
length
maximum
grade
roads
minimum
frontage
requirement
without
addressing
suggestion
three
requirements
waived
commission
disapproved
plat
two
grounds
first
plat
comply
density
requirements
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
deduction
made
land
taken
parkway
deduction
acreage
attributable
roads
land
slope
second
lots
placed
slopes
grade
greater
plaintiff
ex
developer
appealed
county
board
zoning
appeals
interpretation
residential
cluster
zoning
ordinance
relates
temple
hills
app
november
board
determined
commission
apply
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
effect
evaluating
density
temple
hills
also
decided
measuring
lots
excessive
grades
commission
define
slope
manner
favorable
developer
november
respondent
hamilton
bank
johnson
city
acquired
foreclosure
property
temple
hills
subdivision
yet
developed
total
acres
included
many
parcels
left
blank
preliminary
plat
approved
june
respondent
submitted
two
preliminary
plats
commission
plat
approved
subsequently
reapproved
several
times
plat
indicating
respondent
plans
undeveloped
areas
similar
plat
submitted
developer
new
plat
proposed
development
units
reduction
units
represented
respondent
concession
acres
removed
acreage
land
taken
parkway
june
commission
disapproved
plat
eight
reasons
including
density
grade
problems
cited
october
denial
well
objections
temple
hills
committee
raised
length
two
grade
various
roads
lack
fire
protection
disrepair
road
minimum
frontage
commission
declined
follow
decision
board
zoning
appeals
plat
evaluated
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
stating
board
lacked
jurisdiction
hear
appeals
commission
respondent
filed
suit
district
middle
district
tennessee
pursuant
alleging
commission
taken
property
without
compensation
asserting
commission
estopped
state
law
denying
approval
project
respondent
expert
witnesses
testified
design
meet
commission
eight
objections
allow
respondent
build
units
fewer
respondent
claims
entitled
build
development
sites
result
net
loss
million
app
petitioners
expert
witness
hand
testified
commission
eight
objections
overcome
design
allow
development
approximately
units
tr
trial
jury
found
respondent
denied
economically
viable
use
property
violation
compensation
clause
commission
estopped
state
law
requiring
respondent
comply
current
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
rather
effect
app
jury
awarded
damages
temporary
taking
respondent
property
entered
permanent
injunction
requiring
commission
apply
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
effect
temple
hills
approve
plat
submitted
granted
judgment
notwithstanding
verdict
favor
commission
taking
claim
reasoning
part
respondent
unable
derive
economic
benefit
property
temporary
basis
temporary
deprivation
matter
law
constitute
taking
addition
modified
permanent
injunction
require
commission
merely
apply
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
effect
project
rather
requiring
approval
plat
order
allow
parties
resolve
legitimate
technical
questions
whether
plaintiff
meets
requirements
regulations
applicable
state
local
appeals
procedures
divided
panel
appeals
sixth
circuit
reversed
held
application
government
regulations
affecting
owner
use
property
may
constitute
taking
regulation
denies
owner
economically
viable
use
land
evidence
supported
jury
finding
property
economically
feasible
use
time
commission
refusal
approve
preliminary
plat
jury
verdict
rejecting
petitioners
argument
respondent
never
submitted
plat
complied
regulations
thus
never
acquired
rights
taken
held
jury
estoppel
verdict
indicates
jury
must
found
respondent
acquired
vested
right
state
law
develop
subdivision
according
plat
submitted
even
respondent
vested
right
state
law
finish
development
jury
entitled
find
respondent
reasonable
expectation
development
completed
actions
commission
interfered
expectation
ibid
rejected
district
holding
taking
verdict
stand
matter
law
temporary
denial
property
taking
analyzed
manner
permanent
taking
finally
relying
upon
dissent
san
diego
gas
electric
san
diego
determined
damages
required
compensate
temporary
taking
ii
granted
certiorari
address
question
whether
federal
state
local
governments
must
pay
money
damages
landowner
whose
property
allegedly
taken
temporarily
application
government
regulations
petitioners
amici
contend
answer
question
negative
ruling
government
regulation
never
effect
taking
within
meaning
fifth
amendment
recognize
government
regulation
may
restrictive
denies
property
owner
reasonable
beneficial
use
property
thus
effect
appropriation
property
public
use
concededly
taking
fifth
amendment
according
petitioners
however
regulation
effect
viewed
taking
instead
regulation
viewed
violation
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
attempt
government
use
police
power
effect
result
unduly
oppressive
property
owner
constitutionally
effected
power
eminent
domain
violations
due
process
clause
petitioners
argument
concludes
need
remedied
compensation
twice
left
issue
undecided
san
diego
gas
electric
san
diego
supra
agins
tiburon
find
question
properly
presented
must
left
another
day
whether
examine
planning
commission
application
regulations
fifth
amendment
taking
jurisprudence
precept
due
process
conclude
respondent
claim
premature
iii
examine
posture
respondent
cause
action
first
viewing
stating
claim
compensation
clause
often
referred
regulation
goes
far
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
taking
see
ruckelshaus
monsanto
agins
tiburon
prune
yard
shopping
center
robins
kaiser
aetna
andrus
allard
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
goldblatt
hempstead
central
eureka
mining
even
assuming
decisions
meant
refer
literally
taking
clause
fifth
amendment
therefore
stand
proposition
regulation
may
effect
taking
fifth
amendment
requires
compensation
see
san
diego
dissenting
opinion
even
assuming
fifth
amendment
requires
payment
money
damages
compensate
taking
jury
verdict
case
upheld
respondent
yet
obtained
final
decision
regarding
application
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
property
utilized
procedures
tennessee
provides
obtaining
compensation
respondent
claim
ripe
made
clear
several
recent
decisions
claim
application
government
regulations
effects
taking
property
interest
ripe
government
entity
charged
implementing
regulations
reached
final
decision
regarding
application
regulations
property
issue
hodel
virginia
surface
mining
reclamation
example
rejected
claim
surface
mining
control
reclamation
act
stat
et
effected
taking
indication
record
appellees
availed
opportunities
provided
act
obtain
administrative
relief
requesting
either
variance
requirement
waiver
surface
mining
restrictions
property
owners
seek
administrative
relief
procedures
mutually
acceptable
solution
might
well
reached
regard
individual
properties
thereby
obviating
need
address
constitutional
questions
potential
administrative
solutions
confirms
conclusion
taking
issue
decided
district
simply
ripe
judicial
resolution
omitted
respondent
claim
posture
similar
claims
held
premature
hodel
respondent
submitted
plan
developing
property
thus
passed
beyond
agins
threshold
like
hodel
plaintiffs
respondent
seek
variances
allowed
develop
property
according
proposed
plat
notwithstanding
commission
finding
plat
comply
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
appears
variances
granted
resolve
least
five
commission
eight
objections
plat
board
zoning
appeals
power
grant
certain
variances
zoning
ordinance
including
ordinance
density
requirements
restriction
placing
units
land
slopes
grade
excess
tr
see
supra
commission
power
grant
variances
subdivision
regulations
including
frontage
requirements
indeed
temple
hills
committee
recommended
commission
grant
variances
regulations
app
nevertheless
respondent
seek
variances
either
board
commission
respondent
argues
everything
possible
resolve
conflict
commission
brief
respondent
commission
denial
approval
respondent
plat
equivalent
denial
variances
record
support
respondent
claim
however
evidence
respondent
applied
board
zoning
appeals
variances
zoning
ordinance
noted
developer
sought
ruling
ordinance
effect
applied
neither
respondent
developer
sought
variance
requirements
either
ordinances
although
subdivision
regulations
effect
required
applications
commission
variances
writing
notice
application
given
owners
adjacent
property
record
contains
evidence
respondent
ever
filed
written
request
variances
frontage
requirements
subdivision
regulations
respondent
ever
gave
required
notice
app
see
also
tr
indeed
letter
commission
written
shortly
june
meeting
consider
preliminary
sketch
respondent
took
position
request
variances
commission
commission
approved
proposed
plat
respondent
stands
ready
work
planning
commission
concerning
necessary
variances
initial
sketch
renewed
however
developer
opportunity
detailed
engineering
work
impossible
determine
exact
nature
variances
may
needed
plaintiff
ex
hodel
agins
penn
central
respondent
yet
obtained
final
decision
regarding
allowed
develop
property
reluctance
examine
taking
claims
final
decision
made
compelled
nature
inquiry
required
compensation
clause
although
question
constitutes
taking
purposes
fifth
amendment
proved
problem
considerable
difficulty
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
consistently
indicated
among
factors
particular
significance
inquiry
economic
impact
challenged
action
extent
interferes
reasonable
expectations
see
also
ruckelshaus
monsanto
pruneyard
shopping
center
robins
kaiser
aetna
factors
simply
evaluated
administrative
agency
arrived
final
definitive
position
regarding
apply
regulations
issue
particular
land
question
example
jury
verdict
indicates
found
respondent
denied
economically
feasible
use
property
forced
develop
subdivision
manner
meet
commission
eight
objections
clear
whether
jury
found
respondent
denied
reasonable
beneficial
use
property
eight
objections
met
grant
variance
indeed
expert
witness
testified
regarding
economic
impact
commission
actions
itemize
effect
eight
objections
jury
unable
discern
grant
variance
one
regulations
issue
affected
profitability
development
app
see
also
accordingly
commission
determines
variances
granted
impossible
jury
find
record
whether
respondent
unable
derive
economic
benefit
land
respondent
asserts
required
seek
variances
regulations
suit
predicated
upon
requirement
plaintiff
exhaust
administrative
remedies
bringing
action
patsy
florida
board
regents
question
whether
administrative
remedies
must
exhausted
conceptually
distinct
however
question
whether
administrative
action
must
final
judicially
reviewable
see
ftc
standard
oil
bethlehem
steel
epa
see
generally
wright
miller
cooper
federal
practice
procedure
policies
underlying
two
concepts
often
overlap
finality
requirement
concerned
whether
initial
decisionmaker
arrived
definitive
position
issue
inflicts
actual
concrete
injury
exhaustion
requirement
generally
refers
administrative
judicial
procedures
injured
party
may
seek
review
adverse
decision
obtain
remedy
decision
found
unlawful
otherwise
inappropriate
patsy
concerned
latter
former
difference
best
illustrated
comparing
procedure
seeking
variance
procedures
patsy
respondent
required
exhaust
appears
state
provides
procedures
aggrieved
property
owner
may
seek
declaratory
judgment
regarding
validity
zoning
planning
actions
taken
county
authorities
see
fallin
knox
county
bd
code
ann
supp
respondent
required
resort
procedures
bringing
action
procedures
clearly
remedial
similarly
respondent
required
appeal
commission
rejection
preliminary
plat
board
zoning
appeals
board
empowered
review
rejection
participate
commission
decisionmaking
resort
procedures
result
judgment
whether
commission
actions
violated
respondent
rights
contrast
resort
procedure
obtaining
variances
result
conclusive
determination
commission
whether
allow
respondent
develop
subdivision
manner
respondent
proposed
commission
refusal
approve
preliminary
plat
determine
issue
prevents
respondent
developing
subdivision
without
obtaining
necessary
variances
leaves
open
possibility
respondent
may
develop
subdivision
according
plat
obtaining
variances
short
commission
denial
approval
conclusively
determine
whether
respondent
denied
reasonable
beneficial
use
property
therefore
final
reviewable
decision
second
reason
taking
claim
yet
ripe
respondent
seek
compensation
procedures
state
provided
fifth
amendment
proscribe
taking
property
proscribes
taking
without
compensation
hodel
virginia
surface
mining
reclamation
fifth
amendment
require
compensation
paid
advance
contemporaneously
taking
required
reasonable
certain
adequate
provision
obtaining
compensation
exist
time
taking
regional
rail
reorganization
act
cases
quoting
cherokee
nation
southern
kansas
see
also
ruckelshaus
monsanto
yearsley
ross
construction
hurley
kincaid
government
provided
adequate
process
obtaining
compensation
resort
process
yield
compensation
property
owner
claim
government
taking
monsanto
thus
held
taking
claims
federal
government
premature
property
owner
availed
process
provided
tucker
act
monsanto
similarly
state
provides
adequate
procedure
seeking
compensation
property
owner
claim
violation
compensation
clause
used
procedure
denied
compensation
recognition
property
owner
suffered
violation
compensation
clause
owner
unsuccessfully
attempted
obtain
compensation
procedures
provided
state
obtaining
compensation
analogous
holding
parratt
taylor
ruled
person
deprived
property
random
unauthorized
act
state
employee
state
claim
due
process
clause
merely
alleging
deprivation
property
situation
constitution
require
predeprivation
process
impossible
impracticable
provide
meaningful
hearing
deprivation
instead
constitution
satisfied
provision
meaningful
postdeprivation
process
thus
state
action
complete
sense
causing
constitutional
injury
unless
state
fails
provide
adequate
postdeprivation
remedy
property
loss
hudson
palmer
likewise
constitution
require
pretaking
compensation
instead
satisfied
reasonable
adequate
provision
obtaining
compensation
taking
state
action
complete
state
fails
provide
adequate
compensation
taking
tennessee
law
property
owner
may
bring
inverse
condemnation
action
obtain
compensation
alleged
taking
property
certain
circumstances
code
ann
statutory
scheme
eminent
domain
proceedings
outlines
procedures
government
entities
must
exercise
right
eminent
domain
state
prohibited
enter
ing
upon
condemned
land
procedures
utilized
compensation
paid
owner
government
entity
take
possession
land
without
following
required
procedures
owner
land
may
petition
jury
inquest
case
proceedings
may
near
may
hereinbefore
provided
may
sue
damages
ordinary
way
iv
turn
analysis
respondent
claim
due
process
theory
petitioners
espouse
noted
theory
government
regulation
effect
taking
fifth
amendment
requires
compensation
instead
regulation
goes
far
effect
taking
eminent
domain
invalid
exercise
police
power
violative
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
government
wish
accomplish
goals
regulation
must
proceed
exercise
eminent
domain
power
course
pay
compensation
property
taken
remedy
regulation
goes
far
due
process
theory
compensation
invalidation
regulation
authorized
appropriate
actual
damages
notion
excessive
regulation
constitute
taking
compensation
clause
stems
language
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
see
san
diego
dissenting
opinion
writing
pennsylvania
coal
justice
holmes
stated
general
rule
least
property
may
regulated
certain
extent
regulation
goes
far
recognized
taking
argue
excessive
regulation
considered
violation
due
process
clause
rather
taking
assert
pennsylvania
coal
used
word
taking
literal
fifth
amendment
sense
metaphor
actions
effect
taking
eminent
domain
see
agins
city
tiburon
cal
aff
fred
french
investing
city
new
york
issue
presented
pennsylvania
coal
regarding
compensation
argued
free
use
term
loosely
due
process
argument
finds
support
told
fact
pennsylvania
coal
framed
question
presented
whether
police
power
stretched
far
destroy
property
rights
emphasis
upon
need
proceed
eminent
domain
rather
regulation
effect
regulation
destroy
property
interests
government
hardly
go
extent
values
incident
property
diminished
without
paying
every
change
general
law
long
recognized
values
enjoyed
implied
limitation
must
yield
police
power
obviously
implied
limitation
must
limits
contract
due
process
clauses
gone
one
fact
consideration
determining
limits
extent
diminution
reaches
certain
magnitude
cases
must
exercise
eminent
domain
compensation
sustain
act
ibid
emphasis
added
need
pass
upon
merits
petitioners
arguments
even
viewed
question
due
process
respondent
claim
premature
viewing
regulation
goes
far
invalid
exercise
police
power
rather
taking
compensation
must
paid
resolve
difficult
problem
define
far
distinguish
point
regulation
becomes
onerous
effect
appropriation
property
eminent
domain
physical
possession
noted
resolution
question
depends
significant
part
upon
analysis
effect
commission
application
zoning
ordinance
subdivision
regulations
value
respondent
property
profit
expectations
effect
measured
final
decision
made
regulations
applied
respondent
property
decision
made
time
respondent
filed
action
respondent
failed
apply
variances
regulations
sum
respondent
claim
premature
whether
analyzed
deprivation
property
without
due
process
fourteenth
amendment
taking
compensation
clause
fifth
amendment
therefore
reverse
judgment
appeals
remand
case
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
justice
powell
took
part
decision
case
footnotes
developer
also
submitted
preliminary
plat
approved
reapproved
several
subsequent
occasions
contending
right
develop
property
according
plat
noted
plat
indicate
parcels
developed
app
board
zoning
appeals
empowered
hear
decide
appeals
permit
decision
determination
refusal
made
county
building
commissioner
administrative
official
carrying
enforcement
provision
resolution
interpret
zoning
map
resolution
hear
decide
applications
variances
terms
resolution
variances
shall
granted
reason
exceptional
narrowness
shallowness
shape
specific
piece
property
time
adoption
resolution
lot
record
reason
exceptional
topographic
situations
conditions
piece
property
strict
application
provisions
resolution
result
practical
difficulties
undue
hardship
upon
owner
property
plaintiff
ex
respondent
also
alleged
commission
refusal
approve
plat
violated
respondent
rights
substantive
procedural
due
process
denied
equal
protection
district
granted
directed
verdict
petitioners
substantive
due
process
equal
protection
claims
jury
found
respondent
denied
procedural
due
process
app
issues
us
tr
respondent
claimed
entitled
build
units
units
allegedly
approved
minus
units
already
built
given
final
approval
minus
units
longer
available
land
taken
subdivision
parkway
although
record
less
clear
appears
jury
calculated
award
determining
fair
rate
return
value
property
time
commission
rejection
preliminary
plat
jury
verdict
march
see
tr
oral
arg
light
disposition
case
need
reach
question
whether
measure
damages
provide
compensation
whether
appropriate
respondent
cause
action
viewed
stating
claim
due
process
clause
respondent
appeal
pending
appeals
parties
reached
agreement
whereby
commission
granted
variance
regulations
approved
development
units
respondent
agreed
among
things
rebuild
existing
roads
build
new
roads
according
current
regulations
app
brief
petitioners
judge
wellford
dissented
agree
evidence
supported
finding
respondent
property
taken
part
evidence
respondent
formally
requested
variance
regulations
even
temporary
denial
economically
viable
use
property
judge
wellford
held
mere
fluctuations
value
process
governmental
decisionmaking
incidents
ownership
considered
taking
quoting
agins
tiburon
also
agree
damages
awarded
remedy
taking
reasoning
san
diego
gas
dissent
reflect
views
majority
never
awarded
damages
temporary
taking
invasion
physical
occupation
seizure
direction
state
landowner
property
subdivision
regulations
effect
provided
variances
may
granted
following
conditions
subdivider
show
strict
adherence
regulations
cause
unnecessary
hardship
due
conditions
beyond
control
subdivider
subdivider
creates
hardship
due
design
effort
increase
yield
lots
subdivision
variance
granted
planning
commission
decides
topographical
conditions
peculiar
site
departure
regulations
destroy
intent
ca
app
commission
regulations
required
applicant
must
file
planning
commission
written
request
variance
stating
least
following
variance
requested
reason
circumstances
requiring
variance
notice
adjacent
property
owners
variance
requested
without
application
condition
shown
plat
require
variance
constitute
grounds
disapproval
plat
respondent
requested
apparently
granted
waiver
regulation
section
vi
subdivision
see
plaintiff
exs
wrote
letter
january
respondent
contends
must
construed
request
waiver
regulation
entire
subdivision
contend
road
grade
slope
question
adequately
provided
subdivision
regulations
zoning
ordinance
planning
commission
given
authority
approve
roads
grades
excess
particular
case
common
knowledge
beginning
due
character
land
involved
roads
exceeded
slope
fact
first
section
stretch
road
exceeds
therefore
respectfully
request
letter
made
official
part
planning
commission
minutes
january
zoning
approval
granted
allowed
stand
without
changes
defendants
ex
even
assuming
arguendo
letter
constituted
request
variance
respondent
taking
claim
nevertheless
ripe
evidence
respondent
requested
variances
regulations
formed
basis
objections
raised
commission
regulating
length
absent
final
decision
regarding
application
eight
commission
objections
impossible
tell
whether
land
retained
reasonable
beneficial
use
whether
respondent
expectation
interests
destroyed
district
instructions
allowed
jury
find
taking
ascertained
regulations
question
applied
respondent
property
denied
respondent
economically
viable
use
property
tr
instruction
seems
assume
respondent
taking
theory
simply
property
rendered
valueless
application
new
zoning
laws
subdivision
regulations
record
indicates
however
respondent
claim
based
upon
theory
vested
rights
alleged
taking
commission
interference
respondent
expectation
interest
completing
development
according
original
plans
evidence
economically
feasible
develop
units
respondent
claims
commission
actions
limit
developing
based
upon
cost
building
development
according
original
plan
expected
income
sale
units
apparently
measured
cost
golf
course
cost
installing
water
sewer
connections
large
development
installed
development
units
app
tr
see
also
thus
evidence
appears
indicate
profitable
develop
units
respondent
made
various
expenditures
expectation
development
contain
far
units
evidence
appear
support
proposition
aside
reliance
expenditures
development
units
property
economically
feasible
express
view
propriety
applying
economic
viability
test
taking
claim
based
upon
theory
vested
rights
expectation
interest
cf
andrus
allard
analyzing
claim
government
regulations
effected
taking
reducing
expected
profits
sufficient
purposes
note
whether
property
taken
viewed
land
respondent
expectation
interest
developing
land
wished
impossible
determine
extent
loss
interference
commission
decided
whether
grant
variance
application
regulations
necessary
contrast
procedures
provided
review
commission
actions
obtaining
declaratory
judgment
see
code
ann
procedures
allow
property
owner
obtain
compensation
taking
exhaustion
review
procedures
required
see
patsy
florida
board
regents
explained
however
fifth
amendment
proscribes
takings
without
compensation
constitutional
violation
occurs
compensation
denied
nature
constitutional
right
therefore
requires
property
owner
utilize
procedures
obtaining
compensation
bringing
action
analogy
parratt
imperfect
parratt
extend
situations
involved
logan
zimmerman
brush
deprivation
property
effected
pursuant
established
state
policy
procedure
state
provide
predeprivation
process
unlike
due
process
clause
however
compensation
clause
never
held
require
pretaking
process
compensation
ruckelshaus
monsanto
ever
recognized
interest
served
pretaking
compensation
equally
well
served
compensation
due
process
clause
hand
recognized
predeprivation
process
obvious
value
reaching
accurate
decision
meaningful
opportunity
invoke
discretion
decisionmaker
likely
deprivation
takes
effect
cleveland
board
education
loudermill
predeprivation
process
may
serve
purpose
making
individual
feel
government
dealt
fairly
see
carey
piphus
thus
despite
holding
logan
parratt
reasoning
applied
analogy
special
nature
compensation
clause
see
generally
bosselman
callies
banta
taking
issue
sterk
government
liability
unconstitutional
land
use
regulation
ind
oakes
property
rights
constitutional
analysis
today
rev
stoebuck
police
power
takings
due
process
lee
rev
comment
testing
constitutional
validity
land
use
regulations
substantive
due
process
superior
alternative
takings
analysis
rev
comment
compensation
invalidation
availability
damages
remedy
challenging
land
use
regulations
ucla
rev
cf
costonis
fair
compensation
accommodation
power
antidotes
taking
impasse
land
use
controversies
colum
rev
proposing
regulation
viewed
neither
exercise
police
power
taking
exercise
accommodation
power
require
government
offer
fair
compensation
regulation
goes
far
pennsylvania
coal
homeowners
sought
enjoin
coal
company
mining
coal
house
violation
pennsylvania
kohler
act
prohibited
mining
coal
cause
subsidence
home
industrial
mercantile
establishment
defense
coal
company
argued
regulation
taking
compensation
required
surface
support
anthracite
district
necessary
public
use
constitutionally
acquired
condemnation
compensation
parties
affected
attempt
determine
regulation
goes
far
becomes
literally
figuratively
taking
called
lawyer
equivalent
physicist
hunt
quark
haar
planning
ed
see
generally
bauman
inverse
condemnation
fifth
amendment
justice
brennan
confronts
inevitable
land
use
controls
rutgers
stoebuck
supra
berger
policy
analysis
taking
problem
rev
sax
takings
private
property
public
rights
yale
van
alstyne
taking
damaging
police
power
search
inverse
condemnation
criteria
cal
rev
michelman
property
utility
fairness
comments
ethical
foundations
compensation
law
harv
rev
sax
takings
police
power
yale
light
disposition
need
reach
question
whether
jury
verdict
respondent
expectation
interest
taken
see
supra
stand
light
absence
discussion
jury
instructions
reasonableness
alleged
expectation
interest
see
ruckelshaus
monsanto
andrus
allard
need
reach
question
whether
jury
properly
allowed
determine
economic
feasibility
property
extent
interference
respondent
expectation
interests
reference
portion
development
purchased
respondent
rather
reference
development
whole
cf
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
joins
concurring
today
discusses
two
methods
analyzing
constitutional
injury
may
result
temporary
application
government
regulations
denying
property
economically
viable
use
concludes
either
approach
respondent
claim
premature
petitioner
williamson
county
regional
planning
commission
disapproval
respondent
preliminary
plat
constitute
final
reviewable
decision
given
availability
variance
procedure
respondent
pursue
ante
join
opinion
without
however
departing
views
set
forth
san
diego
gas
electric
san
diego
brennan
dissenting
nvalidation
unaccompanied
payment
damages
hardly
compensate
landowner
economic
loss
suffered
time
property
taken
believe
establishes
regulatory
taking
constitution
demands
government
entity
pay
compensation
period
commencing
date
regulation
first
effected
taking
ending
date
government
entity
chooses
rescind
otherwise
amend
regulation
demonstrates
case
however
commission
denial
approval
conclusively
determine
whether
respondent
denied
reasonable
beneficial
use
property
therefore
final
reviewable
decision
ante
addition
espondent
shown
tennessee
inverse
condemnation
procedure
unavailable
inadequate
utilized
procedure
taking
claim
premature
ante
accordingly
join
opinion
reversing
judgment
appeals
sixth
circuit
justice
stevens
concurring
judgment
zoning
restrictions
species
governmental
regulation
may
impair
value
private
property
impairment
may
occur
one
two
ways
substance
restriction
may
permanently
curtail
economic
value
property
procedures
must
employed
either
obtain
permission
use
property
particular
way
remove
unlawful
restriction
use
may
temporarily
deprive
owner
fair
return
investment
convenience
refer
former
category
permanent
harms
latter
temporary
harms
permanent
harms
fall
three
subcategories
may
impermissible
even
government
willing
pay
may
permissible
provided
property
owner
compensated
loss
may
permissible
even
compensation
paid
permanent
harm
inflicted
zoning
regulations
issue
case
either
second
third
subcategory
demonstrates
available
remedies
exhausted
say
certainty
petitioners
may
required
abandon
restrictions
upon
respondent
unless
prepared
compensate
respondent
whatever
permanent
harm
may
cause
litigation
involving
challenge
governmental
regulation
case
exception
government
contends
public
interest
justifies
harm
property
owner
compensation
need
paid
government
fails
convince
case
entitled
impose
uncompensated
permanent
harm
property
owner
express
ruling
merits
stating
regulation
invalid
characterizing
taking
either
event
essence
holding
conclusion
harm
caused
regulation
one
government
may
impose
unless
prepared
pay
opinion
situation
develops
nothing
constitution
prevents
government
electing
abandon
regulation
fact
jurist
eminent
oliver
wendell
holmes
characterized
regulation
goes
far
taking
mean
regulation
may
never
canceled
must
always
give
rise
right
compensation
extent
case
involves
claim
respondent
suffered
unlawful
permanent
harm
whether
called
taking
merely
invalid
attempt
regulate
correctly
explains
issue
yet
ripe
decision
yet
know
whether
harm
inflicted
zoning
regulations
severe
enough
lead
conclusion
zoning
regulations
go
far
know
however
process
determining
far
regulations
apply
respondent
already
caused
fairly
serious
harm
one
jury
calculated
worth
harm
second
major
category
temporary
harm
temporary
harms
resulting
regulatory
decision
fall
two
broad
subcategories
result
deliberate
decision
appropriate
certain
property
public
use
limited
period
time
governmental
decisionmaking
first
subcategory
includes
example
condemnation
laundry
used
military
duration
world
war
ii
kimball
laundry
condemnation
unexpired
term
lease
general
motors
type
appropriation
correctly
characterized
temporary
taking
second
subcategory
fairly
characterized
inevitable
cost
business
highly
regulated
society
temporary
harms
second
subcategory
unfortunate
necessary
disputes
extent
government
power
inflict
permanent
harms
without
paying
every
time
property
owner
successful
whole
part
challenge
governmental
regulation
whether
zoning
ordinance
health
regulation
traffic
law
almost
certain
suffer
temporary
harm
process
least
usually
incur
significant
litigation
expenses
frequently
incur
substantial
revenue
losses
use
property
temporarily
curtailed
dispute
resolved
situations
temporary
harms
compensable
statutes
authorize
recovery
costs
litigation
including
attorney
fees
sometimes
cost
obtaining
regulatory
approval
budgeted
initial
development
plan
ultimately
recovered
consumers
many
cases
apparently
one
property
owner
effective
remedy
temporary
harm
except
possible
claim
constitutional
rights
violated
property
harmed
even
temporarily
without
due
process
law
may
claim
damages
based
denial
procedural
rights
procedure
employed
determine
whether
particular
regulation
goes
far
fair
know
nothing
constitution
entitles
recover
type
temporary
harm
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
requires
state
employ
fair
procedures
administration
enforcement
kinds
regulations
however
impose
utopian
requirement
enforcement
action
may
impose
cost
upon
citizen
unless
government
position
completely
vindicated
must
presume
regulatory
bodies
zoning
boards
school
boards
health
boards
generally
make
effort
advance
public
interest
performing
official
duties
must
also
recognize
often
become
involved
controversies
ultimately
lose
even
though
controversies
costly
temporarily
harmful
private
citizen
long
fair
procedures
followed
believe
basis
constitution
characterizing
inevitable
every
dispute
taking
private
property
case
substantial
dispute
permissibility
permanent
harm
also
fairness
procedures
employed
petitioners
respondent
made
claim
constitutional
right
due
process
law
violated
conceivably
might
prevailed
theory
proved
unconstitutional
procedure
resulted
unnecessary
delay
obtaining
approval
development
plan
see
ante
proof
failed
issue
jury
found
respondent
denied
procedural
due
process
ante
opinion
finding
completely
disposes
respondent
claim
damages
based
temporary
harm
resulting
controversy
respondent
petitioners
applicability
enforceability
various
zoning
restrictions
involved
case
nothing
record
suggest
petitioners
tried
condemn
part
respondent
property
either
permanently
limited
period
time
temporary
taking
kind
involved
kimball
laundry
supra
general
motors
supra
finding
violation
procedural
due
process
accordingly
award
damages
stand
judgment
must
reversed
example
even
state
willing
compensate
right
appropriate
property
agree
political
religious
views
see
acres
land
see
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
justice
holmes
opinion
stated
general
rule
least
property
may
regulated
certain
extent
regulation
goes
far
recognized
taking
explained
earlier
opinion
however
implies
regulation
reaches
certain
magnitude
cases
must
exercise
eminent
domain
compensation
sustain
act
complete
discussion
point
see
siemon
regulatory
takings
myths
land
use
env
see
industrial
union
dept
american
petroleum
institute
see
raymond
motor
transportation
rice
cf
memphis
light
gas
water
div
craft