enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. 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.

  3. Tyler v. Hennepin County - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_v._Hennepin_County

    Tyler v. Hennepin County, 598 U.S. 631 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case about government seizure of property for unpaid taxes, when the value of the property seized is greater than the tax debt. A unanimous court held that the surplus value is protected by the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause.

  4. Berman v. Parker - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berman_v._Parker

    Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that interpreted the Takings Clause ("nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation") of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

  5. Supreme Court Can Protect Property Owners From Eminent ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-court-protect-property...

    The U.S. Supreme Court invited such abuses with its 2005 ruling in Kelo v. City of New London , which blessed the use of eminent domain to promote economic development by transferring property ...

  6. She Underpaid a Property Tax Bill. So the Government Seized ...

    www.aol.com/news/she-underpaid-property-tax-bill...

    The U.S. Supreme Court waded in on the issue last year, ruling unanimously that Hennepin County, Minnesota, violated the Constitution when it seized an elderly woman's home over a property tax ...

  7. He Lost the Title to His Home Over a Small Property Tax ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/lost-title-home-over-small...

    So the government seized her home in 2021, sold it, and kept the $102,636 profit, despite a 2020 Michigan Supreme Court decision that had ruled the practice unconstitutional.

  8. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_&_Tube_Co...

    Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), also commonly referred to as the Steel Seizure Case or the Youngstown Steel case, [1] was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the president of the United States to seize private property.

  9. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Coal_Co._v._Mahon

    Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (1922), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that whether a regulatory act constitutes a taking requiring compensation depends on the extent of diminution in the value of the property. [1] The decision thereby started the doctrine of regulatory taking.