enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Rindge Co. v. County of Los Angeles - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindge_Co._v._County_of...

    List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 262; 17 Mile Drive – A private scenic road on the California coast some 250 miles north of Malibu on the Monterey peninsula. Berman v. Parker – A later case (1954) in the Supreme Court regarding the power of eminent domain.

  3. Kelo v. City of New London - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

    Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5–4, that the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development does not violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

  4. Eminent domain in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain_in_the...

    Eminent domain has been used to acquire land from African-Americans for urban renewal redevelopments [25] and in other cases to dispossess them and remove them from areas where their presence was not desired by white neighbors, e.g. Bruce's Beach subdivision in Los Angeles, California. [26]

  5. Category:Eminent domain - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Eminent_domain

    Takings Clause case law (62 P) Pages in category "Eminent domain" ... 2008 California Propositions 98 and 99; A.

  6. Eminent domain - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain

    The operative law is a patchwork of statutes and case law. The principal acts are the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 ( 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18), [ 30 ] the Land Compensation Act 1961 , the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 , the Land Compensation Act 1973 , [ 31 ] the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 , part IX of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 ...

  7. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Relocation...

    The Fifth Amendment's Takings clause does not provide for the compensation of relocation expenses if the government takes a citizen's property. [1] Therefore, until 1962, citizens displaced by a federal project were guaranteed just compensation for the property taken by the government, but had no legal right or benefit for the expenses they paid to relocate.

  8. United States v. Carmack - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Carmack

    United States v. Carmack, 329 U.S. 230 (1946), was a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the United States federal government was empowered by Condemnation Act of August 1, 1888; the Public Buildings Act of 1926; and the United States Constitution to exercise its right of eminent domain over land containing buildings owned by a state or local government.

  9. Just compensation - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_compensation

    But in eminent domain cases, fair market value is defined as the highest price obtainable in the open market with the value not being influenced by the imminence of the eminent domain taking. In other words, the property must be valued as if the project for which it is being taken did not exist — this is known as the "project influence" doctrine.