- economic impact
- character of the government’s action—physical invasion, regulatory to the extent of rendering the property useless
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York case brief
Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York (1978)
Facts: NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission refused to approve plans to construct a 50-story office building over Grand Central Terminal, which was designated as a “landmark”. Terminal owner filed a taking challenge to the law.
Issues: until Lucas, these were thought to be the issues in a regulatory takings case.
c. extent to which the regulation interfered w/ “investment-backed” expectations.
Analysis: Court said must look at economic impact of the regulation, the extent that the regulation interferes w/investment-backed expectations, and the character of the governmental action.
Holding: NYC law doesn’t interfere with present uses of the terminal, thus terminal’s expectation as to the use of the land is kept intact. The regulation did not prevent owners all profitable use of the building.
Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
Corthell v. Summit Thread Company (1933) · Facts: Corthell is a salesman for Summit. He invents contraption that is bought b...