We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW--INVERSE CONDEMNATION: DECISION THAT A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A COMPENSABLE TAKING SIGNIFIES A VICTORY FOR LAND-USE PLANNERS.
- Authors
Krogstad, Elizabeth K. H.
- Abstract
The article discusses the court case Wild Rice River Estate Inc. versus the city of Fargo, North Dakota on the use of a temporary moratorium in compensable taking of properties under the U.S. Constitution. The city issued the moratorium to include the Wild Rice properties in its flood control plan. The Takings Clause in the Fifth Amendment does not bar the government from taking properties for public use but ensure that property owners are compensated. The Due Process Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment makes Takings Clause applicable to states.
- Subjects
FARGO (N.D.); NORTH Dakota; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); MORATORIUM on payment of debts; GOVERNMENT purchasing of real property; WILD Rice River Estate Inc.; UNITED States. Constitution
- Publication
North Dakota Law Review, 2007, Vol 83, Issue 3, p1053
- ISSN
0029-2745
- Publication type
Article