san
remo
hotel
et
al
city
county
san
francisco
california
et
argued
march
decided
june
petitioners
hoteliers
respondent
city
initiated
litigation
application
ordinance
requiring
pay
fee
converting
residential
rooms
tourist
rooms
initially
sought
mandamus
california
state
action
stayed
filed
suit
federal
district
asserting
inter
alia
facial
challenges
ordinance
fifth
amendment
takings
clause
although
district
granted
city
summary
judgment
ninth
circuit
abstained
ruling
facial
challenge
railroad
tex
pullman
pending
state
mandamus
action
moot
federal
question
however
affirm
district
ruling
claim
unripe
back
state
petitioners
attempted
reserve
right
return
federal
adjudication
federal
takings
claims
ultimately
california
courts
rejected
petitioners
various
takings
claims
returned
federal
district
advancing
series
federal
takings
claims
depended
issues
identical
previously
resolved
state
courts
order
avoid
barred
suit
general
rule
issue
preclusion
petitioners
asked
district
exempt
federal
takings
claims
reach
full
faith
credit
statute
relying
williamson
county
regional
planning
hamilton
bank
johnson
city
holding
takings
claims
ripe
state
fails
provide
adequate
compensation
taking
petitioners
argued
unless
courts
disregard
takings
cases
plaintiffs
forced
litigate
claims
state
without
realistic
possibility
ever
obtaining
federal
review
holding
inter
alia
petitioners
facial
attack
barred
issue
preclusion
district
reasoned
requires
federal
courts
give
preclusive
effect
judgment
effect
state
laws
added
california
courts
interpreted
relevant
substantive
state
takings
law
coextensively
federal
law
petitioners
federal
claims
constituted
claims
state
courts
already
resolved
affirming
ninth
circuit
rejected
petitioners
contention
general
preclusion
principles
cast
aside
whenever
plaintiffs
must
litigate
state
pullman
williamson
county
held
create
exception
full
faith
credit
statute
order
provide
federal
forum
litigants
seeking
advance
federal
takings
claims
pp
rejects
petitioners
contention
whenever
plaintiffs
reserve
federal
takings
claims
state
england
louisiana
bd
medical
examiners
federal
courts
review
reserved
federal
claims
de
novo
regardless
issues
state
may
decided
may
decided
england
discussion
typical
case
reservations
federal
issues
appropriate
makes
clear
decision
aimed
cases
fundamentally
distinct
petitioners
england
cases
generally
involve
federal
constitutional
challenges
state
statute
avoided
state
construes
statute
particular
manner
cases
purpose
abstention
afford
state
courts
opportunity
adjudicate
issue
functionally
identical
federal
question
avoid
resolving
federal
question
encouraging
determination
may
moot
federal
controversy
see
additionally
made
clear
effective
reservation
federal
claim
dependent
condition
plaintiffs
take
action
broaden
scope
state
review
beyond
deciding
antecedent
issue
ninth
circuit
invoked
pullman
abstention
determining
ripe
federal
question
existed
petitioners
facial
takings
challenge
entitled
insulate
preclusive
effect
one
federal
issue
returned
state
resolve
mandamus
petition
petitioners
however
chose
advance
broader
issues
limited
ones
mandamus
petition
putting
forth
facial
takings
challenges
city
ordinance
state
action
effectively
asked
state
resolve
federal
issue
previously
asked
reserve
england
support
exercise
right
petitioners
takings
claims
fare
better
ninth
circuit
found
claims
unripe
williamson
county
therefore
affirmed
dismissal
never
properly
district
reason
expect
relitigated
full
advanced
state
proceedings
pp
federal
courts
free
disregard
simply
guarantee
takings
plaintiffs
day
federal
petitioners
misplace
reliance
second
circuit
santini
decision
held
parties
forced
litigate
takings
claims
state
pursuant
williamson
county
precluded
claims
resolved
federal
santini
reasoning
unpersuasive
several
reasons
first
petitioners
santini
ultimately
depend
assumption
plaintiffs
right
vindicate
federal
claims
federal
forum
repeatedly
held
contrary
see
allen
mccurry
second
petitioners
argument
assumes
courts
may
simply
create
exceptions
wherever
deem
appropriate
however
held
exception
recognized
unless
later
statute
contains
express
implied
partial
repeal
kremer
chemical
constr
congress
expressed
intent
exempt
federal
takings
claims
third
petitioners
overstated
williamson
county
reach
throughout
litigation
never
required
ripen
state
claim
city
ordinance
facially
invalid
failure
substantially
advance
legitimate
state
interest
see
yee
escondido
raised
heart
facial
takings
challenges
directly
federal
respect
federal
claims
require
ripening
petitioners
incorrect
williamson
county
precludes
state
courts
hearing
simultaneously
plaintiff
request
compensation
state
law
together
claim
alternative
denial
compensation
violate
fifth
amendment
federal
constitution
pp
affirmed
stevens
delivered
opinion
scalia
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
rehnquist
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
kennedy
thomas
joined
san
remo
hotel
et
petitioners
city
county
san
francisco
california
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
stevens
delivered
opinion
case
presents
question
whether
federal
courts
may
craft
exception
full
faith
credit
statute
claims
brought
takings
clause
fifth
amendment
petitioners
operate
hotel
san
francisco
california
hereinafter
city
initiated
litigation
response
application
city
ordinance
required
pay
conversion
fee
california
courts
rejected
petitioners
various
takings
claims
advanced
federal
district
series
federal
takings
claims
depended
issues
identical
previously
resolved
action
order
avoid
bar
issue
preclusion
petitioners
asked
district
exempt
reach
claims
brought
takings
clause
fifth
amendment
petitioners
argument
predicated
williamson
county
regional
planning
hamilton
bank
johnson
city
held
takings
claims
ripe
state
fails
provide
adequate
compensation
taking
unless
courts
disregard
takings
cases
petitioners
argue
plaintiffs
forced
litigate
claims
state
without
realistic
possibility
ever
obtaining
review
federal
forum
ninth
circuit
rejection
argument
conflicted
second
circuit
decision
santini
connecticut
hazardous
waste
management
service
granted
certiorari
resolve
conflict
affirm
judgment
ninth
circuit
san
remo
hotel
hotel
fisherman
wharf
neighborhood
san
francisco
december
shortly
great
earthquake
fire
destroyed
city
hotel
called
new
california
hotel
opened
doors
house
dislocated
individuals
immigrants
artists
laborers
city
officially
licensed
facility
operate
hotel
restaurant
hotel
given
current
name
hotel
fell
financial
difficulties
dilapidated
condition
early
robert
thomas
field
purchased
facility
restored
began
operate
bed
breakfast
inn
see
san
remo
hotel
city
county
san
francisco
cal
rptr
cal
app
officially
depublished
san
francisco
board
supervisors
responded
severe
shortage
affordable
rental
housing
elderly
disabled
persons
instituting
moratorium
conversion
residential
hotel
units
tourist
units
san
francisco
residential
hotel
unit
conversion
demolition
ordinance
hereinafter
hotel
conversion
ordinance
hco
pet
cert
two
years
later
city
enacted
first
version
hotel
conversion
ordinance
regulate
future
conversions
san
francisco
ordinance
codified
et
seq
version
hco
hotel
owner
convert
residential
units
tourist
units
obtaining
conversion
permit
permits
obtained
constructing
new
residential
units
rehabilitating
old
ones
paying
lieu
fee
city
residential
hotel
preservation
fund
account
see
pet
cert
city
substantially
strengthened
hco
eliminating
several
exceptions
existed
version
increasing
size
lieu
fee
hotel
owners
must
pay
converting
residential
units
see
genesis
protracted
dispute
lies
hco
requirement
hotel
file
initial
unit
usage
report
containing
number
residential
tourist
units
hotel
september
pet
cert
jean
iribarren
operating
san
remo
hotel
pursuant
lease
petitioners
requirement
came
effect
iribarren
filed
initial
usage
report
hotel
erroneously
reported
rooms
hotel
residential
consequence
initial
classification
city
zoned
san
remo
hotel
residential
hotel
words
hotel
consisted
entirely
residential
units
zoning
determination
ultimately
meant
despite
fact
san
remo
hotel
operated
practice
tourist
hotel
many
years
petitioners
required
apply
conditional
use
permit
business
officially
tourist
hotel
cal
hco
revised
petitioners
applied
convert
rooms
san
remo
hotel
tourist
use
rooms
relevant
hco
provisions
requested
conditional
use
permit
applicable
zoning
laws
city
planning
commission
granted
petitioners
requested
conversion
conditional
use
permit
imposing
several
conditions
one
included
requirement
petitioners
pay
lieu
petitioners
appealed
arguing
hco
requirement
unconstitutional
otherwise
improperly
applied
hotel
see
city
board
supervisors
rejected
petitioners
appeal
april
march
petitioners
filed
writ
administrative
mandamus
california
superior
action
lay
dormant
several
years
parties
ultimately
agreed
stay
action
petitioners
filed
relief
federal
district
petitioners
filed
federal
first
time
may
petitioners
first
amended
complaint
alleged
four
counts
due
process
substantive
procedural
takings
facial
violations
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
constitution
one
count
seeking
damages
rev
stat
violations
one
pendent
claim
district
granted
respondents
summary
judgment
relevant
action
found
petitioners
facial
takings
claim
untimely
applicable
statute
limitations
takings
claim
unripe
williamson
county
appeal
appeals
ninth
circuit
petitioners
took
unusual
position
decide
federal
claims
instead
abstain
railroad
tex
pullman
return
state
conceivably
moot
remaining
federal
questions
see
app
see
also
appeals
obliged
petitioners
request
respect
facial
challenge
request
respondents
apparently
viewed
outrageous
act
chutzpah
claim
reasoned
ripe
instant
hco
enacted
appropriate
pullman
abstention
principally
petitioners
entire
case
hinged
propriety
planning
commission
zoning
designation
precise
subject
pending
state
mandamus
action
however
affirmed
district
determination
petitioners
takings
claim
claim
application
hco
san
remo
hotel
violated
takings
clause
unripe
petitioners
failed
pursue
inverse
condemnation
action
state
yet
denied
compensation
contemplated
williamson
county
conclusion
ninth
circuit
opinion
appended
stating
petitioners
free
raise
federal
takings
claims
california
courts
however
wanted
retain
right
return
federal
adjudication
federal
claim
must
make
appropriate
reservation
state
citations
omitted
precisely
petitioners
attempted
reactivated
dormant
california
case
yet
petitioners
advanced
claims
federal
abstained
phrased
state
claims
language
sounded
rules
standards
established
refined
takings
jurisprudence
petitioners
claimed
instance
imposition
fee
substantially
advance
legitimate
government
interest
amount
fee
imposed
roughly
proportional
impact
proposed
tourist
use
san
remo
hotel
cal
quoting
petitioners
second
amended
state
complaint
state
trial
dismissed
petitioners
amended
complaint
intermediate
appellate
reversed
held
petitioners
claim
payment
lieu
fee
effected
taking
evaluated
heightened
scrutiny
exacting
scrutiny
fee
failed
essential
nexus
rough
proportionality
tests
inter
alia
based
original
flawed
designation
san
remo
hotel
entirely
residential
use
facility
see
summarizing
appellate
opinion
california
reversed
partial
dissent
three
initially
noted
petitioners
reserved
federal
causes
action
sought
relief
violation
federal
constitution
portion
opinion
discussing
takings
clause
california
constitution
however
noted
appear
construed
clauses
congruently
citing
cases
accordingly
despite
fact
petitioners
sought
relief
california
law
state
decided
analyze
takings
claim
relevant
decisions
principal
constitutional
issue
debated
parties
whether
heightened
level
scrutiny
applied
claim
housing
replacement
fee
substantially
advance
legitimate
state
interests
ibid
quoting
lucas
south
carolina
coastal
council
resolving
debate
focused
opinions
nollan
california
coastal
dolan
city
tigard
rejecting
petitioners
argument
heightened
scrutiny
apply
emphasized
distinction
discretionary
exactions
imposed
executive
officials
ad
hoc
basis
applicable
zoning
involving
determinations
cal
quoting
dolan
situated
hco
within
latter
category
reasoning
ordinance
relied
upon
fixed
fees
computed
formula
generally
applicable
broad
classes
property
concluded
less
demanding
reasonable
relationship
test
apply
hco
monetary
assessments
cal
applying
reasonable
relationship
test
upheld
hco
face
petitioners
facial
challenge
concluded
hco
mandated
conversion
fees
bear
reasonable
relationship
loss
housing
generality
great
majority
cases
respect
petitioners
challenge
concluded
conversion
fee
reasonably
based
number
units
designated
conversion
based
petitioners
estimate
provided
city
remained
unchallenged
years
therefore
reversed
appellate
reinstated
trial
order
dismissing
petitioners
complaint
petitioners
seek
writ
certiorari
california
decision
instead
returned
federal
district
filing
amended
complaint
based
complaint
filed
prior
invoking
pullman
district
held
petitioners
facial
attack
hco
barred
statute
limitations
also
general
rule
issue
preclusion
see
pet
cert
district
reasoned
requires
federal
courts
give
preclusive
effect
judgment
preclusive
effect
laws
state
judgment
rendered
california
courts
interpreted
relevant
substantive
state
takings
law
coextensively
federal
law
petitioners
federal
claims
constituted
claims
already
resolved
state
appeals
affirmed
rejected
petitioners
contention
general
preclusion
principles
cast
aside
whenever
plaintiffs
must
litigate
state
pursuant
pullman
williamson
county
relying
unambiguous
circuit
precedent
absence
clearly
contradictory
decisions
appeals
found
bound
apply
general
issue
preclusion
doctrine
given
general
issue
preclusion
principles
governed
remaining
question
whether
district
properly
applied
doctrine
concluded
expressly
rejected
petitioners
contention
california
takings
law
coextensive
federal
takings
law
held
state
application
reasonable
relationship
test
determination
claims
federal
takings
clause
granted
certiorari
affirm
ii
article
iv
constitution
demands
full
faith
credit
shall
given
state
public
acts
records
judicial
proceedings
every
state
congress
may
general
laws
prescribe
manner
acts
records
proceedings
shall
proved
effect
thereof
congress
responded
constitution
invitation
enacting
first
version
full
faith
credit
statute
see
act
may
ch
stat
modern
version
statute
provides
judicial
proceedings
shall
full
faith
credit
every
within
territories
possessions
law
usage
courts
state
statute
long
understood
encompass
doctrines
res
judicata
claim
preclusion
collateral
estoppel
issue
preclusion
see
allen
mccurry
general
rule
implemented
full
faith
credit
statute
parties
permitted
relitigate
issues
resolved
courts
competent
jurisdiction
predates
found
way
every
system
jurisprudence
obvious
fitness
propriety
without
end
never
put
litigation
hopkins
lee
wheat
explained
rule
demanded
object
civil
courts
established
secure
peace
repose
society
settlement
matters
capable
judicial
determination
enforcement
essential
maintenance
social
order
aid
judicial
tribunals
invoked
vindication
rights
person
property
parties
privies
conclusiveness
attend
judgments
tribunals
respect
matters
properly
put
issue
actually
determined
southern
pacific
case
presented
us
limited
grant
certiorari
one
narrow
question
decide
whether
create
exception
full
faith
credit
statute
ancient
rule
based
order
provide
federal
forum
litigants
seek
advance
federal
takings
claims
ripe
entry
final
state
judgment
denying
compensation
see
williamson
county
essence
petitioners
argument
follows
claim
state
agency
violated
federal
takings
clause
heard
federal
property
owner
denied
compensation
available
state
compensation
procedure
federal
courts
required
disregard
decision
state
order
ensure
federal
takings
claims
considered
merits
federal
see
brief
petitioners
therefore
argument
goes
whenever
plaintiffs
reserve
claims
england
louisiana
bd
medical
examiners
federal
courts
review
reserved
federal
claims
de
novo
regardless
issues
state
may
decided
may
decided
reject
petitioners
contention
although
petitioners
certainly
entitled
reserve
federal
claims
shall
explain
england
support
erroneous
expectation
reservation
fully
negate
preclusive
effect
judgment
respect
federal
issues
might
arise
future
federal
litigation
federal
courts
moreover
free
disregard
simply
guarantee
takings
plaintiffs
day
federal
turn
first
england
iii
england
involved
group
plaintiffs
graduated
chiropractic
school
sought
practice
louisiana
without
complying
educational
requirements
state
medical
practice
act
filed
suit
federal
challenging
constitutionality
act
district
invoked
pullman
abstention
stayed
proceedings
enable
louisiana
courts
decide
preliminary
essential
question
state
law
namely
whether
state
statute
applied
chiropractors
state
however
reached
beyond
question
held
statute
applied
plaintiffs
also
application
consistent
fourteenth
amendment
federal
constitution
federal
district
dismissed
federal
action
without
addressing
merits
federal
claim
appeal
held
federal
abstains
deciding
federal
constitutional
issue
enable
state
courts
address
antecedent
issue
plaintiff
may
reserve
right
return
federal
disposition
federal
claims
case
antecedent
state
issue
requiring
abstention
distinct
reserved
federal
issue
see
discussion
typical
case
reservations
federal
issues
appropriate
makes
clear
holding
limited
cases
fundamentally
distinct
petitioners
typical
england
cases
generally
involve
federal
constitutional
challenges
state
statute
avoided
state
construes
statute
particular
cases
purpose
abstention
afford
state
courts
opportunity
adjudicate
issue
functionally
identical
federal
question
contrary
purpose
pullman
abstention
cases
avoid
resolving
federal
question
encouraging
determination
may
moot
federal
controversy
see
additionally
opinion
made
perfectly
clear
effective
reservation
federal
claim
dependent
condition
plaintiffs
take
action
broaden
scope
state
review
beyond
decision
antecedent
holding
england
support
petitioners
attempt
relitigate
issues
resolved
california
courts
respect
petitioners
facial
takings
claims
appeals
invoked
pullman
abstention
determining
ripe
federal
question
existed
namely
facial
takings
challenge
hco
use
planning
sensitive
area
social
petitioners
pending
state
mandamus
action
potential
mooting
facial
challenge
hco
overturning
city
original
classification
san
remo
hotel
residential
property
ibid
thus
petitioners
entitled
insulate
preclusive
effect
one
federal
issue
facial
constitutional
challenge
hco
returned
state
resolve
petition
writ
mandate
petitioners
however
chose
advance
broader
issues
limited
issues
contained
within
state
petition
writ
administrative
mandamus
ninth
circuit
relied
invoked
pullman
abstention
state
action
petitioners
advanced
request
writ
administrative
mandate
cal
also
various
claims
hco
unconstitutional
face
applied
failure
substantially
advance
legitimate
interest
lack
nexus
required
fees
ultimate
objectives
sought
achieved
via
ordinance
imposition
undue
economic
burden
individual
property
owners
broadening
state
action
beyond
mandamus
petition
include
substantially
advances
claims
petitioners
effectively
asked
state
resolve
federal
issues
asked
reserve
england
support
exercise
right
petitioners
takings
claims
fare
better
initial
matter
appeals
abstain
respect
claims
instead
found
unripe
williamson
county
therefore
affirmed
district
dismissal
claims
unlike
substantially
advances
claims
petitioners
claims
never
properly
district
reason
expect
relitigated
full
advanced
state
proceedings
see
allen
short
opinion
england
support
petitioners
attempt
circumvent
iv
petitioners
ultimate
submission
however
rely
england
alone
rather
argue
federal
courts
simply
apply
ordinary
preclusion
rules
judgments
case
forced
state
ripeness
rule
williamson
county
support
petitioners
rely
appeals
second
circuit
decision
santini
santini
second
circuit
held
parties
litigate
takings
claims
state
involuntarily
pursuant
williamson
county
precluded
claims
resolved
federal
rest
decision
provision
federal
full
faith
credit
statute
cases
construing
law
instead
reasoned
ironic
unfair
procedure
required
plaintiffs
follow
bringing
fifth
amendment
takings
claim
also
precluded
ever
bringing
fifth
amendment
takings
claim
ibid
find
reasoning
unpersuasive
several
reasons
first
petitioners
santini
ultimately
depend
assumption
plaintiffs
right
vindicate
federal
claims
federal
forum
repeatedly
held
contrary
issues
actually
decided
valid
judgments
may
well
deprive
plaintiffs
right
federal
claims
relitigated
federal
see
migra
warren
city
school
dist
bd
allen
even
plaintiff
preferred
litigate
state
required
statute
prudential
rules
see
relevant
question
cases
whether
plaintiff
afforded
access
federal
forum
rather
question
whether
state
actually
decided
issue
fact
law
necessary
judgment
allen
plaintiff
willie
mccurry
invoked
fourth
fourteenth
amendments
unsuccessful
attempt
suppress
evidence
state
criminal
trial
convicted
sought
remedy
alleged
constitutional
violation
bringing
suit
damages
officers
entered
home
relying
special
role
federal
courts
protecting
civil
fact
provided
route
federal
forum
appeals
held
mccurry
entitled
federal
trial
unencumbered
collateral
estoppel
rejected
argument
emphatically
actual
basis
appeals
holding
appears
generally
framed
principle
every
person
asserting
federal
right
entitled
one
unencumbered
opportunity
litigate
right
federal
district
regardless
legal
posture
federal
claim
arises
authority
principle
difficult
discern
lie
constitution
makes
guarantee
leaves
scope
jurisdiction
federal
district
courts
wisdom
congress
authority
found
short
reason
believe
congress
intended
provide
person
claiming
federal
right
unrestricted
opportunity
relitigate
issue
already
decided
state
simply
issue
arose
state
proceeding
rather
engaged
allen
presently
concerned
issues
actually
decided
state
dispositive
federal
claims
raised
also
allen
clear
petitioners
preferred
forced
federal
claims
resolved
issues
decided
state
unfortunately
petitioners
entirely
unclear
preference
federal
forum
matter
constitutional
statutory
purposes
distinction
case
allen
possibly
relevant
fact
petitioners
originally
invoked
jurisdiction
federal
district
abstained
pullman
grounds
petitioners
returned
state
petitioners
takings
claims
never
properly
district
unripe
already
explained
appeals
invoked
pullman
abstention
respect
petitioners
substantially
advances
takings
challenge
petitioners
gratuitously
presented
state
bare
minimum
respect
facial
takings
claim
petitioners
offensive
posture
state
proceeding
proceeded
first
federal
wanted
litigate
substantially
advances
federal
claim
federal
forum
migra
thus
distinction
case
allen
distinction
relevant
significance
second
reason
find
petitioners
argument
unpersuasive
assumes
courts
may
simply
create
exceptions
wherever
courts
deem
appropriate
even
conceding
arguendo
laudable
policy
goal
making
federal
forums
available
deserving
litigants
expressly
rejected
petitioners
view
fundamental
departure
traditional
rules
preclusion
enacted
federal
law
justified
plainly
stated
congress
kremer
chemical
constr
cases
therefore
made
plain
exception
recognized
unless
later
statute
contains
express
implied
partial
repeal
citing
allen
even
plaintiff
resort
state
involuntary
federal
interest
denying
finality
robust
held
congress
must
manifest
intent
depart
concerns
animate
decision
congress
expressed
intent
exempt
full
faith
credit
statute
federal
takings
claims
consequently
apply
normal
assumption
weighty
interests
finality
comity
trump
interest
giving
losing
litigants
access
additional
appellate
tribunal
explained
federated
department
stores
moitie
see
grave
injustice
done
application
accepted
principles
res
judicata
justice
achieved
complex
body
law
developed
period
years
evenhandedly
applied
doctrine
res
judicata
serves
vital
public
interests
beyond
individual
judge
ad
hoc
determination
equities
particular
case
simply
principle
law
equity
sanctions
rejection
federal
salutary
principle
res
quoting
heiser
woodruff
third
petitioners
overstated
reach
williamson
county
throughout
litigation
petitioners
never
required
ripen
heart
complaint
claim
hco
facially
invalid
failed
substantially
advance
legitimate
state
interest
state
see
yee
escondido
petitioners
therefore
raised
facial
takings
challenges
nature
requested
relief
distinct
provision
compensation
directly
federal
alternatively
petitioners
option
reserving
facial
claims
pursuing
claims
along
petition
writ
administrative
mandamus
petitioners
right
however
seek
state
review
substantive
issues
sought
reserve
purpose
england
reservation
grant
plaintiffs
second
bite
apple
forum
choice
respect
federal
claims
require
ripening
reject
petitioners
contention
williamson
county
forbids
plaintiffs
advancing
federal
claims
state
courts
requirement
aggrieved
property
owners
must
seek
compensation
procedures
state
provided
hardly
radical
notion
recognize
practical
matter
significant
number
plaintiffs
necessarily
litigate
federal
takings
claims
state
courts
settled
well
williamson
county
claim
application
government
regulations
effects
taking
property
interest
ripe
government
entity
charged
implementing
regulations
reached
final
decision
regarding
application
regulations
property
issue
consequence
scant
precedent
litigation
federal
district
claims
state
agency
taken
property
violation
fifth
amendment
takings
clause
contrary
cases
takings
jurisprudence
including
nearly
cases
petitioners
rely
came
us
writs
certiorari
state
courts
last
moreover
area
law
recognized
limits
plaintiffs
ability
press
federal
claims
federal
courts
see
fair
assessment
real
estate
mcnary
holding
taxpayers
barred
principle
comity
asserting
actions
validity
state
tax
systems
federal
courts
state
courts
fully
competent
adjudicate
constitutional
challenges
local
decisions
indeed
state
courts
undoubtedly
experience
federal
courts
resolving
complex
factual
technical
legal
questions
related
zoning
regulations
base
petitioners
claim
amounts
little
concern
unfair
give
preclusive
effect
proceedings
chosen
instead
required
order
ripen
federal
takings
claims
whatever
merits
concern
may
free
disregard
full
faith
credit
statute
solely
preserve
availability
federal
forum
appeals
correct
decline
petitioners
invitation
ignore
requirements
judgment
appeals
therefore
affirmed
ordered
san
remo
hotel
et
petitioners
city
county
san
francisco
california
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
chief
justice
rehnquist
justice
justice
kennedy
justice
thomas
join
concurring
judgment
agree
judgment
appeals
affirmed
whatever
reasons
petitioners
chosen
course
litigation
state
courts
quite
clear
precluded
full
faith
credit
statute
relitigating
action
issues
adjudicated
california
courts
see
migra
warren
city
school
dist
bd
allen
mccurry
basis
us
except
reach
claims
brought
takings
clause
see
kremer
chemical
constr
write
separately
explain
think
part
decision
williamson
county
regional
planning
hamilton
bank
johnson
city
may
mistaken
williamson
county
respondent
land
developer
filed
suit
federal
alleging
regulatory
takings
claim
regional
planning
commission
disapproved
respondent
plat
proposals
respondent
appealed
decision
zoning
board
appeals
rather
reaching
merits
found
claim
brought
prematurely
first
held
claim
ripe
government
entity
charged
implementing
regulations
reached
final
decision
regarding
application
regulations
property
issue
respondent
failed
seek
variances
planning
commission
zoning
board
appeals
decided
respondent
failed
meet
requirement
noted
second
reason
taking
claim
yet
ripe
respondent
seek
compensation
procedures
state
provided
claimant
received
final
denial
compensation
available
state
procedures
inverse
condemnation
action
said
claim
violation
compensation
clause
clear
williamson
county
correct
demanding
government
entity
reached
final
decision
respect
claimant
property
claimant
must
seek
compensation
state
bringing
federal
takings
claim
federal
williamson
county
purported
interpret
fifth
amendment
divining
requirement
see
nature
constitutional
right
requires
property
owner
utilize
procedures
obtaining
compensation
bringing
action
recently
referred
merely
prudential
requirement
suitum
tahoe
regional
planning
agency
obvious
either
constitutional
prudential
principles
require
claimants
utilize
state
compensation
procedures
bring
federal
takings
claim
cf
patsy
board
regents
holding
plaintiffs
suing
required
exhausted
state
administrative
remedies
today
attempts
shore
requirement
referring
fair
assessment
real
estate
mcnary
ante
held
principle
comity
reflected
tax
injunction
act
bars
taxpayers
asserting
claims
validity
state
tax
systems
federal
courts
decision
suits
must
brought
state
driven
unique
sensitive
interests
stake
federal
courts
confront
claims
acted
impermissibly
administering
tax
systems
historically
grounded
concerns
led
longstanding
fundamental
principle
comity
federal
courts
state
governments
particularly
area
state
taxation
principle
predated
enactment
decided
interests
favored
requiring
taxpayers
bring
challenges
validity
state
tax
systems
state
despite
strong
interests
favoring
review
alleged
constitutional
violations
state
officials
today
makes
claim
longstanding
principle
comity
toward
state
courts
handling
federal
takings
claims
existed
time
williamson
county
decided
one
since
developed
remark
however
state
courts
familiar
issues
involved
local
zoning
regulations
suggests
makes
proper
relegate
federal
takings
claims
state
ante
apparent
expertise
matches
type
historically
grounded
interests
found
necessary
decision
fair
assessment
event
explained
hand
authority
federal
takings
claims
state
courts
based
simply
relative
familiarity
local
decisions
proceedings
allowing
plaintiffs
proceed
directly
federal
cases
involving
example
challenges
municipal
regulations
based
first
amendment
see
renton
playtime
theatres
young
american
mini
theatres
equal
protection
clause
see
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
village
belle
terre
boraas
short
affirmative
case
requirement
yet
made
finally
williamson
county
rule
created
real
anomalies
justifying
revisiting
issue
example
holding
today
ensures
litigants
go
state
seek
compensation
likely
unable
later
assert
federal
takings
claims
federal
ante
even
preclusion
law
block
litigant
claim
doctrine
might
insofar
williamson
county
read
characterize
state
courts
denial
compensation
required
element
fifth
amendment
takings
claim
see
exxon
mobil
saudi
basic
industries
recognizes
ante
williamson
county
guarantees
claimants
unable
utilize
federal
courts
enforce
fifth
amendment
compensation
guarantee
basic
principle
state
courts
competent
enforce
federal
rights
adjudicate
federal
takings
claims
sound
see
ante
apply
number
federal
claims
cf
providing
limited
federal
habeas
review
adjudications
alleged
violations
constitution
principle
explain
federal
takings
claims
particular
singled
confined
state
absence
asserted
justification
congressional
joined
opinion
williamson
county
reflection
experience
lead
think
justifications
requirement
suspect
impact
takings
plaintiffs
dramatic
addressed
correctness
williamson
county
neither
party
asked
us
reconsider
resolving
issue
benefit
petitioners
appropriate
case
believe
reconsider
whether
plaintiffs
asserting
fifth
amendment
takings
claim
based
final
decision
state
local
government
entity
must
first
seek
compensation
state
courts
footnotes
although
petitioners
asked
review
two
separate
questions
grant
certiorari
limited
exclusively
question
whether
fifth
amendment
takings
claim
barred
issue
preclusion
based
judgment
denying
compensation
solely
state
law
rendered
state
proceeding
required
ripen
federal
takings
claim
pet
cert
thus
occasion
reach
petitioners
claim
california
law
substantive
state
takings
law
decision
california
entitled
preclusive
effect
federal
see
brief
petitioners
seems
despite
initial
classification
san
remo
hotel
operated
mixed
hotel
tourists
residents
since
long
hco
enacted
according
california
declaration
petitioners
iribarren
filed
initial
unit
usage
report
without
knowledge
first
discovered
report
resumed
operation
hotel
protested
residential
use
classification
told
changed
appeal
period
passed
cal
application
specifically
required
petitioners
pay
percent
cost
replacement
housing
lost
residential
units
offer
lifetime
leases
residential
users
obtain
variances
ratio
parking
requirements
specifically
count
alleged
hco
facially
unconstitutional
takings
clause
fails
substantially
advance
legitimate
government
interests
deprives
plaintiffs
opportunity
earn
fair
return
investment
denies
plaintiffs
economically
viable
use
property
forces
plaintiffs
bear
public
burden
housing
poor
without
compensation
first
amended
supplemental
complaint
count
advanced
petitioners
takings
clause
violation
predicated
rationale
appeals
answer
question
whether
claim
barred
statute
limitations
district
held
reservation
discussed
ninth
circuit
opinion
common
reservation
federal
claims
made
state
litigation
england
louisiana
bd
medical
examiners
respect
claims
regulation
fails
advance
legitimate
state
interest
see
generally
lingle
chevron
slip
respect
rough
proportionality
claims
see
generally
nollan
california
coastal
dolan
city
tigard
justice
baxter
justice
chin
opined
hotel
rooms
previously
rented
tourists
lieu
payment
excessive
cal
justice
brown
opined
statute
effectively
superseded
hco
disagreed
majority
analysis
constitutional
issues
plaintiffs
sought
relief
state
violation
fifth
amendment
constitution
explicitly
reserved
federal
causes
action
petition
writ
mandate
well
rests
solely
state
law
federal
question
presented
decided
case
ibid
see
also
last
mentioned
prong
high
takings
analysis
issue
emphasis
added
see
noting
hco
generally
applicable
legislation
applies
without
discretion
discrimination
every
residential
hotel
city
meaningful
government
discretion
enters
either
imposition
calculation
lieu
fee
noted
general
class
property
owners
included
properties
containing
rooms
concluded
hco
applies
property
class
logically
subject
strictures
residential
hotel
units
rationally
demanded
local
land
use
legislation
order
qualify
deferential
review
third
amended
complaint
filed
november
alleged
two
separate
counts
see
app
count
alleged
hco
facially
unconstitutional
unconstitutional
petitioners
failed
substantially
advance
legitimate
government
interests
forced
petitioners
bear
public
burden
housing
poor
imposed
unreasonable
conditions
petitioners
request
conditional
use
permit
lieu
fee
required
lifetime
leases
residential
tenants
count
sought
relief
based
extortion
imposition
fee
actual
taking
property
penn
central
transp
new
york
city
failure
hco
applied
petitioners
advance
legitimate
state
interests
city
requirement
petitioners
bear
full
cost
providing
general
public
benefit
public
housing
without
compensation
district
found
petitioners
claims
amounted
nothing
improperly
labeled
facial
challenges
see
pet
cert
remainder
petitioners
claims
held
barred
statute
limitations
california
courts
apply
issue
preclusion
final
judgment
earlier
litigation
parties
issue
decided
prior
case
identical
one
presented
final
judgment
merits
prior
case
party
estopped
party
prior
adjudication
reasoned
california
decision
satisfied
criteria
petitioners
takings
challenges
raised
state
identical
federal
claims
based
factual
allegations
ibid
limited
review
case
include
question
whether
appeals
reading
california
preclusion
law
error
statute
existed
essentially
unchanged
form
since
enactment
ratification
constitution
allen
mccurry
res
judicata
final
judgment
merits
action
precludes
parties
privies
relitigating
issues
raised
action
collateral
estoppel
decided
issue
fact
law
necessary
judgment
decision
may
preclude
relitigation
issue
suit
different
cause
action
involving
party
first
case
citations
omitted
authority
res
judicata
limitations
admitted
derived
us
roman
law
canonists
washington
alexandria
georgetown
sickles
see
also
noting
rule
also
pedigree
courts
upon
continent
europe
courts
chancery
admiralty
great
britain
function
adjudication
performed
entire
tribunal
composed
one
judges
grant
certiorari
many
issues
discussed
parties
amici
therefore
assume
purposes
decision
issues
protracted
controversy
correctly
decided
assume
instance
ninth
circuit
properly
interpreted
california
preclusion
law
california
correct
determination
california
takings
law
coextensive
federal
law
matter
california
law
hco
lawfully
applied
petitioners
hotel
california
law
lieu
fee
imposed
evenhandedly
substantially
advanced
legitimate
state
interests
stressed
england
abstention
essential
prevent
district
deciding
constitutionality
basis
preliminary
guesses
regarding
local
law
describing
typical
case
one
state
courts
asked
construe
state
statute
backdrop
federal
constitutional
challenge
explained
allen
holding
england
depended
entirely
view
purpose
abstention
case
plaintiff
properly
invokes
jurisdiction
first
instance
federal
claim
federal
duty
accept
jurisdiction
abstention
may
serve
postpone
rather
abdicate
jurisdiction
since
purpose
determine
whether
resolution
federal
question
even
necessary
obviate
risk
federal
erroneous
construction
state
law
emphasis
added
citations
omitted
party
freely
without
reservation
submits
federal
claims
decision
state
courts
litigates
decided
elected
forgo
right
return
district
petitioners
facial
challenges
hco
ripe
course
yee
escondido
held
facial
challenges
based
substantially
advances
test
need
ripened
state
claims
depend
extent
petitioners
deprived
economic
use
particular
pieces
property
extent
particular
petitioners
compensated
ibid
expressed
similar
views
migra
warren
city
school
dist
bd
although
division
may
seem
attractive
plaintiff
perspective
system
established
statute
embodies
view
important
give
full
faith
credit
judgments
ensure
separate
forums
federal
state
claims
reflects
variety
concerns
including
notions
comity
need
prevent
vexatious
litigation
desire
conserve
judicial
resources
events
petitioners
may
longer
advance
claims
given
recent
holding
advances
formula
valid
takings
test
indeed
proper
place
takings
jurisprudence
lingle
slip
see
dolan
penn
central
footnotes
creating
rule
addition
relying
fifth
amendment
text
analogized
ruckelshaus
monsanto
parratt
taylor
several
petitioners
amici
case
urged
cases
provided
limited
support
requirement
see
brief
defenders
property
rights
et
al
amici
curiae
brief
elizabeth
neumont
et
al
amici
curiae
indeed
courts
apply
requirement
williamson
county
regional
planning
hamilton
bank
johnson
city
refusing
entertain
federal
takings
claim
claimant
receives
final
denial
compensation
available
state
procedures
see
breneric
assoc
city
del
mar
cal
app
cal
rptr
melillo
city
new
precludes
litigants
asserting
federal
takings
claim
even
state
tries
avoid
anomaly
asserting
plaintiffs
attempting
raise
federal
takings
claim
state
alternative
state
claims
williamson
county
command
state
courts
impose
requirement
ante
williamson
county
requirement
merely
prudential
rule
constitutional
mandate
question
today
conspicuously
leaves
open