loretto
teleprompter
manhattan
catv
argued
march
decided
june
new
york
statute
provides
landlord
must
permit
cable
television
catv
company
install
catv
facilities
upon
property
may
demand
payment
company
excess
amount
determined
state
commission
reasonable
pursuant
statute
commission
ruled
payment
reasonable
fee
purchasing
apartment
building
new
york
city
appellant
landlord
discovered
appellee
catv
companies
installed
cables
building
crossovers
serving
buildings
noncrossovers
serving
appellant
tenants
appellant
brought
class
action
damages
injunctive
relief
new
york
state
alleging
inter
alia
installation
cables
insofar
appellee
companies
relied
new
york
statute
constituted
taking
without
compensation
appellee
new
york
city
granted
companies
exclusive
franchise
provide
catv
within
certain
areas
city
intervened
upholding
new
york
statute
trial
granted
summary
judgment
appellees
appellate
division
new
york
appeals
also
upheld
statute
holding
serves
legitimate
police
power
purpose
eliminating
landlord
fees
conditions
inhibit
development
catv
important
educational
community
benefits
rejecting
appellant
argument
physical
occupation
authorized
government
necessarily
taking
held
statute
excessive
economic
impact
upon
appellant
measured
aggregate
property
rights
interfere
reasonable
expectations
accordingly
work
taking
appellant
property
held
new
york
statute
works
taking
portion
appellant
property
entitled
compensation
fifth
amendment
made
applicable
fourteenth
amendment
pp
character
governmental
action
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
permanent
physical
occupation
real
property
taking
extent
occupation
without
regard
whether
action
achieves
important
public
benefit
minimal
economic
impact
owner
pp
extent
government
permanently
occupies
physical
property
effectively
destroys
owner
rights
possess
use
dispose
property
moreover
owner
suffers
special
kind
injury
stranger
invades
occupies
owner
property
invasion
qualitatively
severe
regulation
use
property
since
owner
may
control
timing
extent
nature
invasion
constitutional
protection
rights
private
property
made
depend
size
area
permanently
occupied
pp
cable
installation
appellant
building
constituted
taking
traditional
physical
occupation
test
since
involved
direct
physical
attachment
plates
boxes
wires
bolts
screws
building
completely
occupying
space
immediately
upon
roof
along
building
exterior
wall
constitutional
difference
crossover
noncrossover
installation
since
portions
installation
necessary
types
installation
permanently
appropriated
appellant
property
fact
new
york
statute
applies
buildings
used
rental
property
make
simply
regulation
use
real
property
physical
occupation
one
type
property
another
less
physical
occupation
new
york
statute
purport
give
tenant
enforceable
property
rights
respect
catv
installation
thus
construed
merely
granting
tenant
property
right
appurtenance
leasehold
application
physical
occupation
rule
case
dire
consequences
government
power
adjust
relationships
since
way
alters
usual
analysis
governing
state
power
require
landlords
comply
building
codes
pp
marshall
delivered
opinion
burger
powell
rehnquist
stevens
joined
blackmun
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
white
joined
post
michael
gruen
argued
cause
filed
briefs
appellant
erwin
griswold
argued
cause
appellees
brief
appellees
teleprompter
manhattan
catv
et
al
michael
lesch
frederick
schwarz
leonard
koerner
filed
brief
appellee
city
new
york
michael
botwin
james
bierbower
filed
brief
national
satellite
cable
association
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
robert
abrams
attorney
general
pro
se
shirley
adelson
siegel
solicitor
general
lawrence
logan
assistant
attorney
general
attorney
general
new
york
brenda
fox
james
ewalt
robert
john
roper
national
cable
television
association
stuart
robinowitz
richard
rosen
new
york
state
cable
television
association
justice
marshall
delivered
opinion
case
presents
question
whether
minor
permanent
physical
occupation
owner
property
authorized
government
constitutes
taking
property
compensation
due
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
constitution
new
york
law
provides
landlord
must
permit
cable
television
company
install
cable
facilities
upon
property
exec
law
mckinney
supp
case
cable
installation
occupied
portions
appellant
roof
side
building
new
york
appeals
ruled
appropriation
amount
taking
conclude
physical
occupation
property
taking
reverse
appellant
jean
loretto
purchased
apartment
building
located
west
street
new
york
city
previous
owner
granted
appellees
teleprompter
teleprompter
manhattan
catv
collectively
teleprompter
permission
install
cable
building
exclusive
privilege
furnishing
cable
television
catv
services
tenants
new
york
appeals
described
installation
follows
june
teleprompter
installed
cable
slightly
less
inch
diameter
approximately
feet
length
along
length
building
inches
roof
top
directional
taps
approximately
inches
inches
inches
front
rear
roof
june
cable
extended
another
feet
cable
run
directional
taps
adjoining
building
west
street
initially
teleprompter
roof
cables
service
appellant
building
part
described
cable
highway
circumnavigating
city
block
service
cables
periodically
dropped
front
back
building
tenant
desired
service
crucial
network
use
crossovers
cable
lines
extending
one
building
another
order
reach
new
group
tenants
two
years
appellant
purchased
building
teleprompter
connected
noncrossover
line
one
provided
catv
service
appellant
tenants
dropping
line
first
floor
front
appellant
building
prior
teleprompter
routinely
obtained
authorization
installations
property
owners
along
cable
route
compensating
owners
standard
rate
gross
revenues
teleprompter
realized
particular
property
facilitate
tenant
access
catv
state
new
york
enacted
executive
law
effective
january
section
provides
landlord
may
interfere
installation
cable
television
facilities
upon
property
premises
may
demand
payment
tenant
permitting
catv
demand
payment
catv
company
excess
amount
state
commission
cable
television
shall
regulation
determine
reasonable
landlord
may
however
require
catv
company
tenant
bear
cost
installation
indemnify
damage
caused
installation
pursuant
state
commission
ruled
payment
normal
fee
landlord
entitled
matter
implementation
section
executive
law
statement
general
policy
new
york
state
commission
cable
television
statement
general
policy
app
clarification
general
policy
app
commission
ruled
nominal
fee
commission
concluded
equivalent
landlord
receive
property
condemned
pursuant
new
york
transportation
corporations
law
satisfied
constitutional
requirements
absence
special
showing
greater
damages
attributable
taking
statement
general
policy
app
appellant
discover
existence
cable
purchased
building
brought
class
action
teleprompter
behalf
owners
real
property
state
teleprompter
placed
catv
components
alleging
teleprompter
installation
trespass
insofar
relied
taking
without
compensation
requested
damages
injunctive
relief
appellee
city
new
york
granted
teleprompter
exclusive
franchise
provide
catv
within
certain
areas
manhattan
intervened
special
term
granted
summary
judgment
teleprompter
city
upholding
constitutionality
crossover
noncrossover
situations
misc
appellate
division
affirmed
without
opinion
app
div
appeal
appeals
dissent
upheld
statute
concluded
law
requires
landlord
allow
crossover
noncrossover
installations
permits
request
payment
catv
company
level
determined
state
cable
commission
noncrossovers
ruled
law
serves
legitimate
police
power
purpose
eliminating
landlord
fees
conditions
inhibit
development
catv
important
educational
community
benefits
rejecting
argument
physical
occupation
authorized
government
necessarily
taking
stated
regulation
excessive
economic
impact
upon
appellant
measured
aggregate
property
rights
interfere
reasonable
expectations
accordingly
held
work
taking
appellant
property
chief
judge
cooke
dissented
reasoning
physical
appropriation
portion
appellant
property
taking
without
regard
balancing
analysis
courts
ordinarily
employ
evaluating
whether
regulation
taking
light
holding
appeals
occasion
determine
whether
fee
ordinarily
awarded
noncrossover
installation
adequate
compensation
taking
judge
gabrielli
concurring
agreed
dissent
law
works
taking
concluded
presumptive
award
together
procedures
permitting
landlord
demonstrate
greater
entitlement
affords
compensation
noted
probable
jurisdiction
ii
appeals
determined
serves
legitimate
public
purpose
rapid
development
maximum
penetration
means
communication
important
educational
community
aspects
thus
within
state
police
power
reason
question
determination
separate
question
however
whether
otherwise
valid
regulation
frustrates
property
rights
compensation
must
paid
see
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
delaware
morristown
conclude
permanent
physical
occupation
authorized
government
taking
without
regard
public
interests
may
serve
constitutional
history
confirms
rule
recent
cases
question
purposes
takings
clause
compel
retention
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
supra
surveyed
general
principles
governing
takings
clause
noted
set
formula
existed
determine
cases
whether
compensation
constitutionally
due
government
restriction
property
ordinarily
must
engage
essentially
ad
hoc
factual
inquiries
inquiry
standardless
economic
impact
regulation
especially
degree
interference
expectations
particular
significance
character
governmental
action
taking
may
readily
found
interference
property
characterized
physical
invasion
government
interference
arises
public
program
adjusting
benefits
burdens
economic
life
promote
common
good
ibid
citation
omitted
penn
central
affirms
often
upheld
substantial
regulation
owner
use
property
deemed
necessary
promote
public
interest
time
long
considered
physical
intrusion
government
property
restriction
unusually
serious
character
purposes
takings
clause
cases
establish
physical
intrusion
reaches
extreme
form
permanent
physical
occupation
taking
occurred
case
character
government
action
important
factor
resolving
whether
action
works
taking
also
determinative
faced
constitutional
challenge
permanent
physical
occupation
real
property
invariably
found
taking
early
pumpelly
green
bay
wall
held
defendant
construction
pursuant
state
authority
dam
permanently
flooded
plaintiff
property
constituted
taking
unanimous
stated
without
qualification
real
estate
actually
invaded
superinduced
additions
water
earth
sand
material
artificial
structure
place
effectually
destroy
impair
usefulness
taking
within
meaning
constitution
seven
years
later
reemphasized
importance
physical
occupation
distinguishing
regulation
merely
restricted
use
private
property
northern
transportation
chicago
held
city
construction
temporary
dam
river
permit
construction
tunnel
taking
even
though
plaintiffs
thereby
denied
access
premises
obstruction
impaired
use
plaintiffs
property
distinguished
earlier
cases
permanent
flooding
private
property
regarded
taking
pumpelly
supra
involving
physical
invasion
real
estate
private
owner
practical
ouster
possession
case
contrast
entry
made
upon
plaintiffs
lot
since
early
cases
consistently
distinguished
flooding
cases
involving
permanent
physical
occupation
one
hand
cases
involving
temporary
invasion
government
action
outside
owner
property
causes
consequential
damages
within
taking
always
found
former
situation
see
lynah
bedford
cress
sanguinetti
taking
flooding
must
constitute
actual
permanent
invasion
land
amounting
appropriation
merely
injury
property
kansas
city
life
ins
louis
western
union
telegraph
applied
principles
enunciated
pumpelly
situation
closely
analogous
one
presented
today
case
held
city
louis
exact
reasonable
compensation
telegraph
company
placement
telegraph
poles
city
public
streets
reasoned
use
company
makes
streets
exclusive
permanent
one
one
temporary
shifting
common
general
public
ordinary
traveler
whether
foot
vehicle
passes
fro
along
streets
use
occupation
thereof
temporary
shifting
space
occupies
one
moment
abandons
next
occupied
traveller
use
made
telegraph
company
respect
much
space
occupies
poles
permanent
exclusive
effectually
permanently
dispossesses
general
public
destroyed
amount
ground
whatever
benefit
public
may
receive
way
transportation
messages
space
far
respects
actual
use
purposes
highway
personal
travel
wholly
lost
public
matters
exclusive
appropriation
taken
whether
steam
railroads
street
railroads
telegraphs
telephones
state
may
chooses
exact
party
corporation
given
exclusive
use
pecuniary
compensation
general
public
deprived
common
use
portion
thus
appropriated
emphasis
added
recent
cases
confirm
distinction
permanent
physical
occupation
physical
invasion
short
occupation
regulation
merely
restricts
use
property
causby
ruled
frequent
flights
immediately
landowner
property
constituted
taking
comparing
overflights
quintessential
form
taking
reason
frequency
altitude
flights
respondents
use
land
purpose
loss
complete
complete
entered
upon
surface
land
taken
exclusive
possession
omitted
doubt
erected
elevated
railway
respondents
land
precise
altitude
planes
fly
partial
taking
even
though
none
supports
structure
rested
land
reason
intrusion
immediate
direct
subtract
owner
full
enjoyment
property
limit
exploitation
two
wartime
takings
cases
also
instructive
pewee
coal
unanimously
held
government
seizure
direction
operation
coal
mine
prevent
national
strike
coal
miners
constituted
taking
though
members
differed
losses
suffered
period
government
control
compensable
plurality
little
difficulty
concluding
actual
taking
possession
control
taking
clear
government
held
full
title
ownership
plurality
opinion
black
frankfurter
douglas
jackson
joined
justice
challenged
portion
opinion
central
eureka
mining
contrast
found
taking
government
issued
wartime
order
requiring
nonessential
gold
mines
cease
operations
purpose
conserving
equipment
manpower
use
mines
essential
war
effort
dissenting
justice
harlan
complaint
practical
matter
order
led
consequences
different
followed
temporary
acquisition
physical
possession
mines
reasoned
government
occupy
use
manner
take
physical
possession
gold
mines
equipment
connected
concluded
temporary
though
severe
restriction
use
mines
justified
exigency
war
cf
ymca
ordinarily
course
government
occupation
private
property
deprives
private
owner
use
property
deprivation
constitution
requires
compensation
although
recent
cases
addressed
precise
issue
us
emphasized
physical
invasion
cases
special
repudiated
rule
permanent
physical
occupation
taking
cases
state
imply
physical
invasion
subject
balancing
process
suggest
permanent
physical
occupation
ever
exempt
taking
clause
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
noted
contains
one
complete
discussions
takings
clause
explained
resolving
whether
public
action
works
taking
ordinarily
ad
hoc
inquiry
several
factors
particularly
significant
economic
impact
regulation
extent
interferes
expectations
character
governmental
action
opinion
repudiate
rule
permanent
physical
occupation
government
action
unique
character
taking
without
regard
factors
might
ordinarily
examine
kaiser
aetna
held
government
imposition
navigational
servitude
requiring
public
access
pond
taking
landowner
reasonably
relied
government
consent
connecting
pond
navigable
water
emphasized
servitude
took
landowner
right
exclude
one
essential
sticks
bundle
rights
commonly
characterized
property
explained
case
government
exercising
regulatory
power
manner
cause
insubstantial
devaluation
petitioner
private
property
rather
imposition
navigational
servitude
context
result
actual
physical
invasion
privately
owned
marina
even
government
physically
invades
easement
property
must
nonetheless
pay
compensation
see
causby
portsmouth
emphasis
added
another
recent
case
underscores
constitutional
distinction
permanent
occupation
temporary
physical
invasion
prune
yard
shopping
center
robins
upheld
state
constitutional
requirement
shopping
center
owners
permit
individuals
exercise
free
speech
petition
rights
property
already
invited
general
public
emphasized
state
constitution
prevent
owner
restricting
expressive
activities
imposing
reasonable
time
place
manner
restrictions
minimize
interference
owner
commercial
functions
since
invasion
temporary
limited
nature
since
owner
exhibited
interest
excluding
persons
property
fact
solicitors
may
physically
invaded
owners
property
viewed
determinative
short
character
governmental
action
penn
central
permanent
physical
occupation
property
cases
uniformly
found
taking
extent
occupation
without
regard
whether
action
achieves
important
public
benefit
minimal
economic
impact
owner
historical
rule
permanent
physical
occupation
another
property
taking
tradition
commend
appropriation
perhaps
serious
form
invasion
owner
property
interests
borrow
metaphor
cf
andrus
allard
government
simply
take
single
strand
bundle
property
rights
chops
bundle
taking
slice
every
strand
property
rights
physical
thing
described
rights
possess
use
dispose
general
motors
extent
government
permanently
occupies
physical
property
effectively
destroys
rights
first
owner
right
possess
occupied
space
also
power
exclude
occupier
possession
use
space
power
exclude
traditionally
considered
one
treasured
strands
owner
bundle
property
rights
see
kaiser
aetna
see
also
restatement
property
second
permanent
physical
occupation
property
forever
denies
owner
power
control
use
property
exclude
others
make
nonpossessory
use
property
although
deprivation
right
use
obtain
profit
property
every
case
independently
sufficient
establish
taking
see
andrus
allard
supra
clearly
relevant
finally
even
though
owner
may
retain
bare
legal
right
dispose
occupied
space
transfer
sale
permanent
occupation
space
stranger
ordinarily
empty
right
value
since
purchaser
also
unable
make
use
property
moreover
owner
suffers
special
kind
injury
stranger
directly
invades
occupies
owner
property
part
supra
indicates
property
law
long
protected
owner
expectation
relatively
undisturbed
least
possession
property
require
well
owner
permit
another
exercise
complete
dominion
literally
adds
insult
injury
see
michelman
property
utility
fairness
comments
ethical
foundations
compensation
law
harv
rev
furthermore
occupation
qualitatively
severe
regulation
use
property
even
regulation
imposes
affirmative
duties
owner
since
owner
may
control
timing
extent
nature
invasion
see
infra
traditional
rule
also
avoids
otherwise
difficult
linedrawing
problems
disagree
state
required
landlords
permit
third
parties
install
swimming
pools
landlords
rooftops
convenience
tenants
requirement
taking
cable
installation
occupied
much
space
disagree
occupation
taking
constitutional
protection
rights
private
property
made
depend
size
area
permanently
occupied
indeed
possible
future
additional
cable
installations
significantly
restrict
landlord
use
roof
building
made
section
requires
landlord
permit
multiple
installations
finally
whether
permanent
physical
occupation
occurred
presents
relatively
problems
proof
placement
fixed
structure
land
real
property
obvious
fact
rarely
subject
dispute
fact
occupation
shown
course
consider
extent
occupation
one
relevant
factor
determining
compensation
due
reason
moreover
less
need
consider
extent
occupation
determining
whether
taking
first
instance
teleprompter
cable
installation
appellant
building
constitutes
taking
traditional
test
installation
involved
direct
physical
attachment
plates
boxes
wires
bolts
screws
building
completely
occupying
space
immediately
upon
roof
along
building
exterior
wall
light
analysis
find
constitutional
difference
crossover
noncrossover
installation
portions
installation
necessary
crossovers
noncrossovers
permanently
appropriate
appellant
property
accordingly
type
installation
taking
appellees
raise
series
objections
application
traditional
rule
teleprompter
notes
law
applies
buildings
used
rental
property
draws
conclusion
law
simply
permissible
regulation
use
real
property
fail
see
however
physical
occupation
one
type
property
another
type
less
physical
occupation
insofar
teleprompter
means
suggest
permanent
physical
invasion
must
differ
long
property
remains
residential
catv
company
wishes
retain
installation
landlord
must
permit
teleprompter
also
asserts
related
argument
state
effectively
granted
tenant
property
right
catv
installation
placed
roof
building
appurtenance
tenant
leasehold
short
answer
purport
give
tenant
enforceable
property
rights
respect
catv
installation
lower
courts
rest
decisions
ground
course
teleprompter
appellant
tenants
actually
owns
installation
moreover
government
unlimited
power
redefine
property
rights
see
webb
fabulous
pharmacies
beckwith
state
ipse
dixit
may
transform
private
property
public
property
without
compensation
finally
agree
appellees
application
physical
occupation
rule
dire
consequences
government
power
adjust
relationships
consistently
affirmed
broad
power
regulate
housing
conditions
general
relationship
particular
without
paying
compensation
economic
injuries
regulation
entails
see
heart
atlanta
motel
discrimination
places
public
accommodation
queenside
hills
realty
saxl
fire
regulation
bowles
willingham
rent
control
home
building
loan
assn
blaisdell
mortgage
moratorium
edgar
levy
leasing
siegel
emergency
housing
law
block
hirsh
rent
control
none
cases
however
government
authorize
permanent
occupation
landlord
property
third
party
consequently
holding
today
way
alters
analysis
governing
state
power
require
landlords
comply
building
codes
provide
utility
connections
mailboxes
smoke
detectors
fire
extinguishers
like
common
area
building
long
regulations
require
landlord
suffer
physical
occupation
portion
building
third
party
analyzed
multifactor
inquiry
generally
applicable
nonpossessory
governmental
activity
see
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
iii
holding
today
narrow
affirm
traditional
rule
permanent
physical
occupation
property
taking
case
property
owner
entertains
historically
rooted
expectation
compensation
character
invasion
qualitatively
intrusive
perhaps
category
property
regulation
however
question
equally
substantial
authority
upholding
state
broad
power
impose
appropriate
restrictions
upon
owner
use
property
furthermore
conclusion
works
taking
portion
appellant
property
presuppose
fee
many
landlords
obtained
teleprompter
prior
law
enactment
proper
measure
value
property
taken
issue
amount
compensation
due
express
opinion
matter
state
courts
consider
remand
judgment
new
york
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
appeals
defined
crossover
comprehensively
occurring
hen
line
servicing
tenants
particular
building
extended
adjacent
adjoining
buildings
amplifier
placed
building
used
amplify
signals
tenants
building
neighboring
building
buildings
line
placed
building
none
tenants
provided
catv
service
purpose
providing
service
adjoining
adjacent
building
new
york
exec
law
mckinney
supp
provides
part
landlord
shall
interfere
installation
cable
television
facilities
upon
property
premises
except
landlord
may
require
installation
cable
television
facilities
conform
reasonable
conditions
necessary
protect
safety
functioning
appearance
premises
convenience
tenants
ii
cable
television
company
tenant
combination
thereof
bear
entire
cost
installation
operation
removal
facilities
iii
cable
television
company
agree
indemnify
landlord
damage
caused
installation
operation
removal
facilities
demand
accept
payment
tenant
form
exchange
permitting
cable
television
service
within
property
premises
cable
television
company
exchange
therefor
excess
amount
commission
shall
regulation
determine
reasonable
discriminate
rental
charges
otherwise
tenants
receive
cable
television
service
status
granted
accordance
appellant
request
except
owners
dwellings
catv
component
placed
excluded
notice
class
postponed
however
stipulation
professor
michelman
accurately
summarized
case
law
concerning
role
concept
physical
invasions
development
takings
jurisprudence
one
time
commonly
held
absence
explicit
expropriation
compensable
taking
occur
physical
encroachment
occupation
modern
significance
physical
occupation
courts
sometimes
hold
nontrespassory
injuries
compensable
never
deny
compensation
physical
takeover
one
incontestable
case
compensation
short
formal
expropriation
seems
occur
government
deliberately
brings
agents
public
large
regularly
use
permanently
occupy
space
thing
theretofore
understood
private
ownership
michelman
property
utility
fairness
comments
ethical
foundations
compensation
law
harv
rev
emphasis
original
footnotes
omitted
see
also
sackman
nichols
law
eminent
domain
rev
ed
tribe
american
constitutional
law
historical
discussions
see
cooke
dissenting
bosselman
callies
banta
taking
issue
stoebuck
general
theory
eminent
domain
rev
dunham
griggs
allegheny
county
perspective
thirty
years
expropriation
law
rev
cormack
legal
concepts
cases
eminent
domain
yale
city
new
york
objects
case
involved
city
right
charge
use
streets
power
eminent
domain
city
excluded
company
use
streets
physical
occupation
principle
upon
right
compensation
based
often
cited
authority
eminent
domain
cases
see
western
union
telegraph
pennsylvania
california
also
squarely
held
insofar
company
relied
federal
statute
authorizing
use
post
roads
appropriation
state
property
require
compensation
louis
western
union
telegraph
early
commentators
viewed
physical
occupation
real
property
quintessential
deprivation
property
see
blackstone
commentaries
lewis
law
eminent
domain
invasion
property
except
case
necessity
either
upon
surface
whether
temporary
permanent
taking
constructing
ditch
passing
tunnel
laying
gas
water
sewer
pipes
soil
extending
structures
bridge
telephone
wire
omitted
emphasis
original
nichols
law
eminent
domain
ed
indeed
although
dissenting
justice
harlan
treated
restriction
physical
occupation
significant
relied
physical
appropriation
paradigm
taking
see
central
eureka
mining
city
new
york
opinion
appeals
place
great
emphasis
penn
central
reference
physical
invasion
government
argue
similar
invasion
private
party
treated
differently
disagree
permanent
physical
occupation
authorized
state
law
taking
without
regard
whether
state
instead
party
authorized
state
occupant
see
pumpelly
green
bay
wall
penn
central
simply
holds
cases
physical
invasion
short
permanent
appropriation
fact
government
commits
invasion
directly
benefits
one
relevant
factor
determining
whether
taking
occurred
see
also
andrus
allard
case
held
prohibition
sale
eagle
feathers
taking
applied
traders
bird
artifacts
regulations
challenged
compel
surrender
artifacts
physical
invasion
restraint
upon
case
crucial
appellees
retain
rights
possess
transport
property
donate
devise
protected
birds
oss
future
profits
unaccompanied
physical
property
restriction
provides
slender
reed
upon
rest
takings
claim
teleprompter
reliance
labor
cases
requiring
companies
permit
access
union
organizers
see
hudgens
nlrb
central
hardware
nlrb
nlrb
babcock
wilcox
similarly
misplaced
recently
explained
allowed
intrusion
property
rights
limited
necessary
facilitate
exercise
employees
rights
organize
national
labor
relations
act
requisite
need
access
employer
property
shown
access
limited
union
organizers
ii
prescribed
areas
employer
premises
iii
duration
organization
activity
short
principle
accommodation
announced
babcock
limited
labor
organization
campaigns
yielding
property
rights
may
require
temporary
limited
central
hardware
supra
permanence
absolute
exclusivity
physical
occupation
distinguish
temporary
limitations
right
exclude
every
physical
invasion
taking
pruneyard
shopping
center
robins
kaiser
aetna
intermittent
flooding
cases
reveal
temporary
limitations
subject
complex
balancing
process
determine
whether
taking
rationale
evident
absolutely
dispossess
owner
rights
use
exclude
others
property
dissent
objects
distinction
permanent
physical
occupation
temporary
invasion
always
clear
post
objection
overstated
event
irrelevant
critical
point
permanent
physical
occupation
unquestionably
taking
antitrust
area
similarly
declined
apply
per
se
rule
simply
must
boundary
rule
apply
rule
reason
engage
complex
balancing
analysis
causby
approvingly
cited
butler
frontier
telephone
holding
ejectment
lie
telephone
wire
strung
across
plaintiff
property
without
touching
soil
quoted
following
language
owner
entitled
absolute
undisturbed
possession
every
part
premises
including
space
much
mine
beneath
wire
huge
cable
several
inches
thick
foot
ground
difference
degree
principle
expand
wire
beam
supported
posts
standing
upon
abutting
lots
without
touching
surface
plaintiff
land
difference
still
one
degree
enlarge
beam
bridge
yet
space
occupied
erect
house
upon
bridge
air
surface
land
alone
disturbed
quoting
butler
frontier
telephone
supra
although
city
new
york
granted
exclusive
franchise
teleprompter
required
state
law
see
exec
law
et
seq
mckinney
supp
future
changes
technology
may
cause
city
reconsider
decision
indeed
present
communities
apparently
grant
nonexclusive
franchises
brief
national
satellite
cable
association
et
al
amici
curiae
case
appeals
noted
testimony
preceding
enactment
landlord
interest
excluding
cable
installation
consists
entirely
insisting
negligible
unoccupied
space
remain
unoccupied
emphasis
omitted
state
cable
commission
referred
testimony
establishing
presumptive
award
statement
general
policy
app
number
dissent
arguments
likely
increases
building
resale
value
attractiveness
rental
market
post
appellant
might
alternative
use
space
post
may
also
relevant
amount
compensation
due
noted
however
first
argument
speculative
contradicted
appellant
testimony
whole
block
able
sell
buildings
higher
price
absent
installation
app
constitutionally
irrelevant
whether
appellant
predecessor
title
previously
occupied
space
since
landowner
owns
least
much
space
ground
occupy
use
connection
land
causby
supra
dissent
asserts
taking
cubic
foot
space
constitutional
significance
post
assertion
appears
factually
incorrect
since
ignores
two
large
silver
boxes
appellant
identified
part
installation
app
loretto
affidavit
support
motion
summary
judgment
apr
appellants
appendix
app
although
record
reveal
size
appellant
approximately
brief
appellant
appellees
dispute
statement
displaced
volume
excess
cubic
feet
event
facts
critical
whether
installation
taking
depend
whether
volume
space
occupies
bigger
breadbox
true
landlord
avoid
requirements
ceasing
rent
building
tenants
landlord
ability
rent
property
may
conditioned
forfeiting
right
compensation
physical
occupation
teleprompter
broad
argument
proves
much
example
allow
government
require
landlord
devote
substantial
portion
building
vending
washing
machines
profits
retained
owners
services
compensation
deprivation
space
even
allow
government
requisition
certain
number
apartments
permanent
government
offices
right
property
owner
exclude
stranger
physical
occupation
land
easily
manipulated
also
decline
hazard
opinion
respective
rights
landlord
tenant
state
law
prior
enactment
use
space
occupied
cable
installation
issue
parties
sharply
disagree
required
landlords
provide
cable
installation
tenant
desires
statute
might
present
different
question
question
us
since
landlord
installation
ownership
give
landlord
rights
placement
manner
use
possibly
disposition
installation
fact
ownership
contrary
dissent
simply
incidental
post
give
landlord
rather
catv
company
full
authority
installation
except
government
specifically
limited
authority
landlord
decide
comply
applicable
government
regulations
concerning
catv
therefore
minimize
physical
esthetic
effects
installation
moreover
landlord
wished
repair
demolish
construct
area
building
installation
located
need
incur
burden
obtaining
catv
company
cooperation
moving
cable
case
contrast
appellant
suffered
injury
might
obviated
owned
cable
exercise
control
installation
drilling
stapling
accompanied
installation
apparently
caused
physical
damage
appellant
building
app
appellant
resides
building
testified
cable
installation
ugly
although
provides
landlord
may
require
reasonable
conditions
necessary
protect
appearance
premises
may
seek
indemnity
damage
provisions
somewhat
limited
even
provisions
effective
inconvenience
landlord
initiating
repairs
remains
cognizable
burden
light
disposition
appellant
takings
claim
address
contention
deprives
property
without
due
process
law
justice
blackmun
justice
brennan
justice
white
join
dissenting
decisions
construing
takings
clause
state
anything
clearly
set
formula
determine
regulation
ends
taking
begins
goldblatt
town
hempstead
curiously
anachronistic
decision
today
acknowledges
historical
disavowal
set
formulae
almost
breath
constructs
rigid
per
se
takings
rule
permanent
physical
occupation
authorized
government
taking
without
regard
public
interests
may
serve
ante
sustain
rule
recent
precedents
erects
strained
untenable
distinction
temporary
physical
invasions
whose
constitutionality
concededly
subject
balancing
process
permanent
physical
occupations
taking
without
regard
factors
might
ordinarily
examine
ante
view
approach
reduces
constitutional
issue
formalistic
quibble
whether
property
permanently
occupied
temporarily
invaded
sax
takings
police
power
yale
application
formula
facts
case
vividly
illustrates
approach
potentially
dangerous
well
misguided
despite
concession
broad
power
regulate
relationship
without
paying
compensation
economic
injuries
regulation
entails
ante
uses
rule
undercut
carefully
considered
legislative
judgment
concerning
relationships
therefore
respectfully
dissent
examining
new
takings
rule
worth
reviewing
taken
case
issue
feet
cable
inch
diameter
two
metal
boxes
jointly
cable
boxes
occupy
cubic
foot
space
roof
appellant
manhattan
apartment
building
appellant
purchased
building
physical
invasion
challenges
already
occurred
appellant
bring
action
five
years
later
demanding
appellee
teleprompter
gross
revenues
building
claiming
operation
exec
law
mckinney
supp
took
property
new
york
appellate
division
new
york
appeals
rejected
claim
upholding
valid
exercise
state
police
power
appeals
held
state
may
proscribe
trespass
action
landlords
generally
cable
tv
company
places
cable
fixtures
roof
landlord
building
order
protect
right
tenants
rental
property
ultimately
pay
charge
landlord
permitted
collect
cable
tv
company
obtain
tv
service
respective
apartments
appeals
found
first
represented
reasoned
legislative
effort
arbitrate
interests
tenants
landlords
encourage
development
important
educational
communications
medium
moreover
pruneyard
shopping
center
robins
fact
authorized
teleprompter
make
minor
physical
intrusion
upon
appellant
property
way
determinative
takings
question
second
concluded
statute
economic
impact
appellant
de
minimis
affect
fair
return
property
third
statute
interfere
appellant
reasonable
expectations
appellant
purchased
building
unaware
existence
cable
see
supra
thus
invested
building
reasonable
expectation
cubic
foot
space
occupied
cable
television
installment
become
ii
given
new
york
appeals
straightforward
application
balancing
test
yielded
finding
taking
becomes
clear
constructs
per
se
rule
reverse
escape
result
dictated
recent
takings
cases
resorting
bygone
precedents
arguing
permanent
physical
occupations
somehow
differ
qualitatively
forms
government
regulation
argues
per
se
rule
based
permanent
physical
occupation
historically
rooted
see
ante
jurisprudentially
sound
see
ante
disagree
respects
precedents
relied
lack
vitality
outside
agrarian
context
decided
chance
lingering
vitality
view
cases
stand
constitutional
rule
uniquely
unsuited
modern
urban
age
furthermore
find
logically
untenable
assertion
must
analyzed
per
se
rule
effectively
destroys
three
treasured
strands
owner
bundle
property
rights
ante
recent
takings
clause
decisions
teach
nonphysical
government
intrusions
private
property
zoning
ordinances
restrictions
become
rule
rather
exception
modern
government
regulation
exudes
intangible
externalities
may
diminish
value
private
property
far
minor
physical
touchings
nevertheless
recognizes
often
upheld
substantial
regulation
owner
use
property
deemed
necessary
promote
public
interest
ante
see
agins
city
tiburon
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
village
euclid
ambler
realty
precisely
extent
government
may
injure
private
interests
depends
little
whether
authorized
physical
contact
avoided
per
se
takings
rules
resting
outmoded
distinctions
physical
nonphysical
intrusions
one
commentator
observed
takings
rule
based
distinction
inherently
suspect
capacity
distinguish
even
crudely
significant
insignificant
losses
puny
taken
seriously
michelman
property
utility
fairness
comments
ethical
foundations
compensation
law
harv
rev
surprisingly
draws
even
finer
distinction
today
temporary
physical
invasions
permanent
physical
occupations
government
authorizes
latter
type
intrusion
find
taking
without
regard
public
interests
regulation
may
serve
ante
yet
examination
three
words
permanent
physical
occupation
formula
illustrates
newly
created
distinction
even
less
substantial
distinction
physical
nonphysical
intrusions
already
rejected
first
mean
permanent
since
temporary
limitations
right
exclude
remain
subject
complex
balancing
process
determine
whether
taking
ante
presumably
describes
government
intrusion
lasts
forever
concedes
require
appellant
permit
cable
installation
forever
long
property
remains
residential
catv
company
wishes
retain
installation
ante
far
permanent
reaffirms
broad
power
regulate
housing
conditions
general
relationship
particular
without
paying
compensation
economic
injuries
regulation
entails
ante
thus
merely
defines
one
many
statutory
responsibilities
new
yorker
accepts
enters
rental
business
appellant
occupies
building
converts
commercial
property
becomes
perfectly
free
exclude
teleprompter
cubic
foot
roof
space
appellant
chooses
use
property
rental
purposes
must
comply
reasonable
government
statutes
regulating
relationship
authorizes
permanent
occupation
thus
works
taking
without
regard
public
interests
may
serve
new
york
statutes
require
landlord
make
physical
attachments
rental
property
also
must
constitute
takings
even
serve
indisputably
valid
public
interests
tenant
protection
safety
denies
theory
invalidates
statutes
require
landlord
suffer
physical
occupation
portion
building
third
party
ante
surely
factor
determinative
since
simultaneously
recognizes
temporary
invasions
third
parties
subject
per
se
rule
qualitative
difference
arise
incidental
fact
teleprompter
rather
appellant
tenants
owns
cable
installation
cf
ante
anything
leaves
appellant
better
housing
statutes
since
ensures
property
damaged
esthetically
physically
see
supra
without
burdening
cost
buying
maintaining
cable
event
test
third
party
problem
remain
even
appellant
owned
cable
long
teleprompter
continuously
passed
electronic
signal
cable
litigant
argue
second
element
formula
physical
touching
stranger
satisfied
therefore
worked
taking
literally
read
test
opens
door
endless
metaphysical
struggles
whether
individual
property
physically
touched
precisely
avoid
permit
ting
technicalities
form
dictate
consequences
substance
central
eureka
mining
harlan
dissenting
abandoned
physical
contacts
test
first
place
third
talismanic
distinction
continuous
occupation
transient
invasion
finds
basis
either
economic
logic
takings
clause
precedent
context
upheld
takings
challenges
rent
control
statutes
permitting
temporary
physical
invasions
considerable
economic
magnitude
see
block
hirsh
statute
permitting
tenants
remain
physical
possession
apartments
two
years
termination
leases
moreover
precedents
record
numerous
temporary
officially
authorized
invasions
third
parties
intruded
owner
enjoyment
property
far
deeply
teleprompter
cable
see
pruneyard
shopping
center
robins
leafletting
demonstrating
busy
shopping
center
kaiser
aetna
public
easement
passage
private
pond
causby
noisy
airplane
flights
private
land
balancing
test
temporary
invasions
found
takings
subjected
none
inflexible
per
se
rule
adapted
analyze
far
less
obtrusive
occupation
issue
present
case
cf
ante
sum
history
teaches
takings
claims
properly
evaluated
multifactor
balancing
test
directing
permanent
physical
occupations
automatically
compensable
without
regard
whether
action
achieves
important
public
benefit
minimal
economic
impact
owner
ante
equity
much
encourages
litigants
manipulate
factual
allegations
gain
benefit
per
se
rule
cf
supra
relish
prospect
distinguishing
inevitable
flow
certiorari
petitions
attempting
shoehorn
insubstantial
takings
claims
today
set
formula
setting
aside
history
also
permanent
physical
occupation
authorized
per
se
taking
uniquely
impairs
appellant
powers
dispose
use
exclude
others
property
see
ante
fact
discussion
nowhere
demonstrates
impairs
private
rights
manner
qualitatively
different
legislation
first
contends
statute
impairs
appellant
legal
right
dispose
space
transfer
sale
claim
dissolves
moment
reflection
someone
buys
appellant
apartment
building
use
rental
purposes
person
cable
removed
use
space
wishes
case
appellant
right
dispose
space
worth
much
exist
even
another
landlord
buys
appellant
building
rental
purposes
render
space
valueless
practical
matter
regulation
ensures
tenants
living
building
access
cable
television
long
building
used
rental
purposes
thereby
likely
increases
building
resale
value
attractiveness
rental
market
event
differs
little
numerous
new
york
statutory
provisions
require
landlords
install
physical
facilities
permanently
occupying
common
spaces
buildings
acknowledges
traditionally
constitutionally
exercised
police
power
require
landlords
provide
utility
connections
mailboxes
smoke
detectors
fire
extinguishers
like
common
area
building
ante
like
provisions
merely
ensure
tenants
access
services
legislature
deems
important
water
electricity
natural
light
telephones
systems
mail
service
see
supra
landlord
dispositional
rights
affected
adversely
sells
building
another
landlord
subject
sells
building
subject
new
york
statutory
provisions
also
suggests
unconstitutionally
alters
appellant
right
control
use
cubic
foot
roof
space
new
york
multiple
dwelling
statutes
oblige
landlords
surrender
significantly
larger
portions
common
space
tenants
use
also
compel
landlord
rather
tenants
private
installers
pay
maintain
equipment
example
new
york
landlords
required
law
provide
pay
mailboxes
occupy
five
times
volume
teleprompter
cable
occupies
appellant
building
see
tr
oral
arg
citing
mult
dwell
law
mckinney
state
constitutionally
insist
appellant
make
sacrifice
tenants
may
receive
mail
hard
understand
state
may
require
surrender
less
space
filled
another
expense
tenants
receive
television
signals
constitutional
purposes
relevant
question
solely
whether
state
interfered
minimal
way
owner
use
space
building
intelligible
takings
inquiry
must
also
ask
whether
extent
state
interference
severe
constitute
compensable
taking
light
owner
alternative
uses
property
appellant
freely
admitted
use
space
teleprompter
equipment
building
see
app
deposition
jean
loretto
third
final
argument
deprived
appellant
power
exclude
occupier
possession
use
space
occupied
cable
ante
argument
two
flaws
first
unjustifiably
assumes
appellant
tenants
countervailing
property
interest
permitting
teleprompter
use
space
second
suggests
new
york
legislature
may
exercise
police
power
affect
appellant
right
exclude
teleprompter
even
cubic
foot
roof
space
long
ago
recognized
new
social
circumstances
justify
legislative
modification
property
owner
rights
without
compensation
legislative
action
serves
sufficiently
important
public
interests
see
munn
illinois
person
property
vested
interest
rule
common
law
indeed
great
office
statutes
remedy
defects
common
law
developed
adapt
changes
time
circumstance
causby
modern
world
ommon
sense
revolts
idea
legislatures
alter
ownership
rights
appeals
recognized
merely
deprives
appellant
trespass
action
teleprompter
long
uses
building
rental
purposes
long
teleprompter
maintains
equipment
compliance
statute
justice
marshall
recently
aptly
observed
appellant
claim
case
amounts
less
suggestion
common
law
trespass
subject
revision
state
accepted
claim
represent
return
era
lochner
new
york
rights
also
found
immune
revision
state
federal
government
approach
freeze
common
law
constructed
courts
perhaps
state
development
allow
room
change
response
changes
circumstance
due
process
clause
require
result
pruneyard
shopping
center
robins
concurring
opinion
iii
end
troubles
today
decision
represents
archaic
judicial
response
modern
social
problem
cable
television
new
growing
somewhat
controversial
communications
medium
see
brief
new
york
state
cable
television
association
amicus
curiae
american
homes
televisions
approximately
million
families
currently
subscribe
cable
television
penetration
rate
expected
double
new
york
legislature
recognized
also
responded
technological
advance
enacting
statute
sought
carefully
balance
interests
private
parties
see
nn
supra
new
york
courts
litigation
one
jurist
dissent
unanimously
upheld
constitutionality
considered
legislative
judgment
reaches
back
time
per
se
rule
disrupts
legislative
determination
like
justice
black
believe
solution
problems
precipitated
technological
advances
new
ways
living
come
application
rigid
constitutional
restraints
formulated
enforced
courts
causby
dissenting
opinion
affirm
judgment
uphold
reasoning
new
york
appeals
see
kaiser
aetna
andrus
allard
abstract
fixed
point
judicial
intervention
takings
clause
becomes
appropriate
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
caltex
rigid
rules
laid
distinguish
compensable
losses
noncompensable
losses
pennsylvania
coal
mahon
takings
question
question
degree
therefore
disposed
general
propositions
january
appellee
teleprompter
signed
installation
agreement
building
previous
owner
exchange
flat
fee
appellee
installed
main
cable
crossover
extension
june
two
years
taking
possession
building
appurtenant
equipment
appellant
object
cable
presence
indeed
despite
numerous
inspections
appellant
never
even
noticed
equipment
teleprompter
first
began
provide
cable
television
service
one
tenants
appellant
thereafter
ever
specifically
ask
teleprompter
remove
components
building
app
although
alludes
presence
two
large
silver
boxes
appellant
roof
ante
new
york
appeals
opinion
nowhere
mentions
dimensions
stated
anywhere
record
found
state
legislature
enacted
prohibit
gouging
arbitrary
action
landlords
many
instances
imposed
extremely
onerous
fees
conditions
cable
access
buildings
citing
testimony
joseph
swidler
chairman
public
service
commission
joint
legislative
committee
considering
catv
bill
given
growing
importance
cable
television
legislature
decided
urban
tenants
need
access
medium
justified
minor
intrusion
upon
landlord
interest
consists
entirely
insisting
negligible
unoccupied
space
remain
unoccupied
tenant
interest
clearly
substantial
consisting
right
receive
perhaps
send
communications
outside
world
electronic
age
landlord
able
preclude
tenant
obtaining
catv
service
exact
surcharge
allowing
service
preclude
tenant
receiving
mail
telegrams
directed
citing
regulation
cable
television
state
new
york
report
new
york
public
service
commission
commissioner
william
jones
section
carefully
regulates
cable
television
company
physical
intrusion
onto
landlord
property
landlord
requests
company
must
conform
installations
reasonable
conditions
necessary
protect
safety
functioning
appearance
premises
convenience
tenants
exec
law
mckinney
supp
furthermore
company
must
agree
indemnify
landlord
damage
caused
installation
operation
removal
facilities
iii
finally
statute
authorizes
landlord
require
either
cable
television
company
tenant
combination
thereof
bear
entire
cost
installation
operation
removal
equipment
ii
properly
acknowledges
none
recent
takings
decisions
adopted
per
se
test
either
temporary
physical
invasions
permanent
physical
occupations
see
ante
relies
historical
dicta
support
per
se
rule
holdings
cites
fall
two
categories
number
cases
involving
flooding
ante
louis
western
union
telegraph
cited
ante
noted
first
line
cases
stands
principle
destruction
privately
owned
land
flooding
taking
extent
destruction
caused
rulings
already
limited
later
decisions
respects
kansas
city
life
ins
even
time
decision
louis
western
union
telegraph
addressed
question
hether
city
power
collect
rental
use
streets
public
places
private
company
seeks
exclusive
use
land
whose
use
common
members
public
open
equally
citizens
state
street
situate
face
issue
distinct
question
whether
appellant
may
extract
teleprompter
fee
continuing
use
roof
space
beyond
fee
set
statute
namely
amount
commission
shall
regulation
determine
reasonable
exec
law
mckinney
supp
view
fact
incidentally
protects
crossover
wires
currently
serve
tenants
see
ante
affect
fundamental
character
piece
legislation
recognizes
ante
crossovers
crucial
links
cable
highway
represent
simplest
economical
way
provide
service
tenants
group
buildings
close
proximity
like
find
constitutional
difference
crossover
noncrossover
installation
ante
even
assuming
arguendo
crossover
extension
case
works
taking
prepared
hold
incremental
governmental
intrusion
caused
wire
occupies
cubic
volume
child
building
block
de
minimis
deprivation
entitled
compensation
see
mult
dwell
law
mckinney
requiring
entrance
doors
lights
windows
skylights
public
halls
stairs
supp
locks
intercommunication
systems
lobby
attendants
peepholes
elevator
mirrors
fire
escapes
bells
mail
receptacles
fire
sprinklers
see
also
queenside
hills
realty
saxl
upholding
constitutionality
new
york
fire
sprinkler
provision
statutes
specify
far
greater
detail
types
physical
facilities
new
york
landlord
must
provide
tenants
must
provide
see
mult
dwell
law
mckinney
owners
multiple
dwellings
must
provide
proper
appliances
receive
distribute
adequate
supply
water
including
proper
sink
running
water
waste
trap
owners
multiple
dwellings
frontage
exceeding
feet
must
provide
least
two
lights
one
side
entrance
way
aggregate
illumination
one
hundred
fifty
watts
equivalent
illumination
supp
owners
class
multiple
dwellings
must
provide
intercommunication
system
located
automatic
door
giving
public
access
main
entrance
hall
lobby
apartment
building
rooftops
exempted
see
landlords
must
place
parapet
walls
guardrails
roofs
three
feet
six
inches
height
level
area
indeed
appellant
counsel
made
precisely
claim
oral
argument
urging
rule
adopts
appellant
counsel
suggested
taking
result
even
appellant
owned
cable
precise
location
easement
taken
teleprompter
changes
surface
roof
inside
wire
wire
owned
landlord
cable
company
right
pass
signal
wire
without
compensation
landlord
commercial
benefit
tr
oral
arg
pretrial
deposition
appellant
conceded
owners
apartment
buildings
thought
cable
presence
enhanced
market
value
buildings
app
also
tenants
upset
cable
connection
removed
reason
provides
support
per
se
rule
asserting
state
require
landlords
without
compensation
permit
third
parties
install
swimming
pools
ante
vending
washing
machines
ante
convenience
tenants
presumably
intrusive
government
regulations
create
difficult
takings
problems
even
traditional
balancing
approach
depending
character
governmental
action
economic
impact
degree
interfered
owner
reasonable
expectations
among
things
hypothetical
examples
might
might
constitute
takings
examples
hardly
prove
however
permanent
physical
occupation
works
de
minimis
interference
private
property
interest
taking
per
se
far
clear
new
york
law
appellant
tenants
lack
property
interests
square
inches
exterior
building
teleprompter
cable
hardware
attach
modern
law
residential
tenancy
merely
possessory
interest
specified
space
also
contract
provision
package
services
facilities
necessary
appurtenant
space
see
schoshinski
american
law
landlord
tenant
modern
urban
tenant
leasehold
often
includes
contractual
also
statutory
rights
including
rights
implied
warranty
habitability
rent
control
services
landlord
obliged
statute
provide
cf
supra
happily
leaves
open
question
whether
provides
landlords
like
appellant
sufficient
compensation
actual
losses
see
ante
since
state
cable
television
commission
regulations
permit
higher
nominal
awards
landlord
makes
special
showing
greater
damages
app
concurring
opinion
new
york
appeals
found
statute
awards
compensation
see
obvious
landlord
actually
incurs
damage
property
restricted
use
might
put
property
receive
compensation
commensurate
greater
injury
remand
following
today
decision
minor
physical
invasion
declared
taking
deserving
little
compensation
net
result
large
expenditure
judicial
resources
constitutional
claim
little
moment