{"title":"甜蜜的肯定","authors":"John L. Marshall","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On April 23, 2002, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency avoided a $27 million trainwreck. The agency, needless to say, breathed a sigh of relief since, in the short run, governments do not win takings cases, they avoid losing them. The Supreme Court's opinion, however, contains some interesting grist for the mills of land-use professionals beyond discussion of the Court's central holding in the case (that Penn Central, not Lucas, applies to regulations that eliminate something less than the total ownership interest). With embarrassing superficiality, I set forth a few observations.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sweet Affirmation\",\"authors\":\"John L. Marshall\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394773\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract On April 23, 2002, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency avoided a $27 million trainwreck. The agency, needless to say, breathed a sigh of relief since, in the short run, governments do not win takings cases, they avoid losing them. The Supreme Court's opinion, however, contains some interesting grist for the mills of land-use professionals beyond discussion of the Court's central holding in the case (that Penn Central, not Lucas, applies to regulations that eliminate something less than the total ownership interest). With embarrassing superficiality, I set forth a few observations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":154411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394773\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394773","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract On April 23, 2002, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency avoided a $27 million trainwreck. The agency, needless to say, breathed a sigh of relief since, in the short run, governments do not win takings cases, they avoid losing them. The Supreme Court's opinion, however, contains some interesting grist for the mills of land-use professionals beyond discussion of the Court's central holding in the case (that Penn Central, not Lucas, applies to regulations that eliminate something less than the total ownership interest). With embarrassing superficiality, I set forth a few observations.