Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
41. Is the court likely to rule in favor of the purchaser?
A purchaser bought land in the mountain foothills just outside a resort town and planned to build a housing development there. Soon thereafter, the county in which the land was located unexpectedly adopted a regulation that, for the first time, prohibited all construction in several foothill and mountain areas, including the area of the purchaser's property. The purpose of the county's regulation was «to conserve for future generations the unique natural wildlife and plant habitats» in the mountain areas. Since the adoption of the regulation, the purchaser has been unable to lease or sell the property at any price. Several realtors have advised the purchaser that the property is now worthless. The purchaser has sued the county, claiming that the regulation has effected a taking of the purchaser's property and that the county therefore owes the purchaser just compensation.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The government's acquisition of property is sufficient, but not necessary, to establish a taking within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment, as applied to the county by the Fourteenth Amendment.
B is incorrect. Physical invasion or intrusion of property is sufficient, but not necessary, to establish a taking within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.
C is incorrect. The Supreme Court does not use such a balancing test for determining whether a governmental action is a taking within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.