Abstract
In a troublesome area of the law, it is hard for a legal academic to resist the temptation to attempt to "enlighten" the judiciary. It has not been the author's practice to date, in ruminating on the profound puzzle of regulatory takings, to instruct judges concerning the errors of their ways. Because only an insider can be truly familiar with the nuances of a specific legal challenge and owing to a deep respect for the judicial craft, this writer has resisted the urge to preach. It has been a sufficiently provocative challenge to interpret the meanings and implications of decisions such as Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles; Keystone Bituminous Coal Association v. DeBenedictis; Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, Yee v. City of Escondido and Dolan v. City of Tigard. However, given that our invitation on this occasion comes from members of the judiciary, it seems suitable, even obligatory, to wax pedantic and professorial over shortcomings in the Supreme Court's recent application of regulatory takings principles in disputes concerning personal property and private funds. ...
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2000
Recommended Citation
Michael Allan Wolf, Taking Regulatory Takings Personally: The Perils of (Mis)Reasoning by Analogy, 51 Ala. L. Rev. 1355 (2000).
Included in
Courts Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons
