远离太浩:r.t.g.公司诉俄亥俄州案中有关包裹定义和妨害辩护的思考

Land Use Law & Zoning Digest Pub Date : 2003-05-01 DOI:10.1080/00947598.2003.10394802

T. Dowling

{"title":"远离太浩:r.t.g.公司诉俄亥俄州案中有关包裹定义和妨害辩护的思考","authors":"T. Dowling","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2003.10394802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Those of us who represent planners and local officials in regulatory takings cases certainly expected the property rights movement to attempt to circumvent last year's landmark decision in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 535 U.S. 302 (2002), 54 ZD 329. What we did not expect is for judges to ignore the ruling altogether.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wandering Far from Tahoe: Reflections on the Relevant Parcel Definition and Nuisance Defense in R.T.G., Inc. v. State of Ohio\",\"authors\":\"T. Dowling\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00947598.2003.10394802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Those of us who represent planners and local officials in regulatory takings cases certainly expected the property rights movement to attempt to circumvent last year's landmark decision in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 535 U.S. 302 (2002), 54 ZD 329. What we did not expect is for judges to ignore the ruling altogether.\",\"PeriodicalId\":154411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-05-01\",\"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/10.1080/00947598.2003.10394802\",\"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/10.1080/00947598.2003.10394802","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

我们这些在监管征收案件中代表规划者和地方官员的人当然期望产权运动试图规避去年在塔霍-塞拉保护委员会诉塔霍地区规划局(535 U.S. 302 (2002)， 54 ZD 329)一案中具有里程碑意义的决定。我们没有想到的是，法官们完全无视这项裁决。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Wandering Far from Tahoe: Reflections on the Relevant Parcel Definition and Nuisance Defense in R.T.G., Inc. v. State of Ohio

Abstract Those of us who represent planners and local officials in regulatory takings cases certainly expected the property rights movement to attempt to circumvent last year's landmark decision in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 535 U.S. 302 (2002), 54 ZD 329. What we did not expect is for judges to ignore the ruling altogether.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Land Use Law & Zoning Digest

自引率

0.00%

发文量