Fifth Amendment (Takings Clause)

558 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 67 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Eastport S.S. Corp. v. The United States
  372 F.2d 1002· Ct. Cl.· 1967-02-17 ·cited 231×
  The Court of Claims held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a claim for business losses resulting from the Maritime Commission's alleged wrongful delay in approving a foreign vessel sale, as such a claim sounds in tort and is barred by the discretionary function exception,
• Graham v. Estuary Props., Inc.
  399 So. 2d 1374· Fla.· 1981-04-16 ·cited 160×·via Takings Claim
  Estuary Properties challenged the denial of its development permit for a large-scale residential and commercial project in environmentally sensitive mangrove wetlands. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial as a valid exercise of police power to prevent environmental harm
• Hernandez v. City OF Lafayette
  643 F.2d 1188· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-01 ·cited 126×
  Local legislators are entitled to absolute immunity under § 1983 for conduct in furtherance of their legislative duties, but municipalities are not entitled to legislative immunity from damages for uncompensated takings of private property through zoning regulations.
• Executive 100, Inc. v. Martin Cnty.
  922 F.2d 1536· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-07 ·cited 123×·via Takings Claim
  The court held that due process takings and just compensation claims are not ripe until a final decision on development and pursuit of compensation is made, but equal protection, arbitrary and capricious due process, and tortious interference claims may proceed.
• Rogin v. Bensalem Twp. & Stephen J. Kelly
  616 F.2d 680· 3d Cir.· 1980-02-21 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the developer's cross-claim failed to state a cause of action under federal law, affirming the district court's dismissal, but found the case was not moot.
• Cities Serv. Co. & Cities Serv. Oil Co. v. Fed. Energy Admin. & Frank G. Zarb
  529 F.2d 1016· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Administration's (FEA) Old Oil Entitlements Program was a valid exercise of authority under the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973 and was not unconstitutional, arbitrary, or capricious.
• Kinzli v. City OF Santa Cruz
  818 F.2d 1449· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 77×·via Takings Claim
  The court held that the Kinzlis' claims were not ripe for adjudication because they had not obtained a final decision from the City regarding development and had not sought compensation through available state procedures.
• Sinaloa Lake Owners Ass'n v. City OF Simi Valley
  882 F.2d 1398· 9th Cir.· 1989-01-06 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' Fifth Amendment taking claim was not ripe because they failed to seek compensation through available state procedures, but their Fourteenth Amendment due process claim was ripe and stated a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Reid v. United States
  715 F.2d 1148· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-16 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the actions were barred by sovereign immunity, improperly filed in state court, and that the sole remedy was an action under the Tucker Act, affirming the district courts' dismissal orders.
• Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Polk
  568 So. 2d 35· Fla.· 1990-09-27 ·cited 62×·via Takings Claim
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Department of Agriculture's destruction of nearly all citrus trees at Polk's nursery constituted a taking requiring just compensation, except for trees showing disease symptoms and those within 125 feet thereof. The court reversed the damag
• Coleman v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  791 F.2d 68· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the penalties imposed under 26 U.S.C. § 6673 and § 6702 for filing frivolous tax returns and maintaining frivolous litigation are constitutional and that the arguments presented by the taxpayers were objectively frivolous.
• Adolph Kizas v. Webster
  707 F.2d 524· D.C. Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 56×
  The court held that federal employees do not possess vested property rights in a former 'special preference' for promotion, and that Title VII is the exclusive remedy for federal employment discrimination claims, requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies.
• Porter v. The United States
  496 F.2d 583· Ct. Cl.· 1974-05-15 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the contract in question was not made by an agency of the United States, and other conclusions of the court are inescapable.
• Temistocles Ramirez de Arellano v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  745 F.2d 1500· D.C. Cir.· 1984-10-05 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the case presented a nonjusticiable political question because the requested relief would require judicial interference with the executive branch's foreign policy decisions.
• Saint Mary OF Nazareth Hosp. Ctr. v. Dep't OF Health & Human Servs.
  698 F.2d 1337· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-01 ·cited 54×
  The court held that costs incurred for providing free care to indigents under the Hill-Burton Act are not reimbursable under Medicare, and that bedside telephones are not necessarily 'personal comfort items' excluded from reimbursement.
• Martori Bros. Distribs. v. Jyrl James-Massengale
  781 F.2d 1349· 9th Cir.· 1986-01-30 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board's (ALRB) 'make-whole' remedy, which includes fringe benefits, is not preempted by ERISA, nor does it violate the Contract Clause or Fifth Amendment.
• Cloutier v. The Town OF Epping
  714 F.2d 1184· 1st Cir.· 1983-08-05 ·cited 52×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the federal claims, finding that while jurisdiction might not have been entirely lacking, the claims either failed to state a federal question or were barred by immunity, and that summary judgment was appropriate on the merits.
• Williams C. Hall and Jean G. Hall v. City OF Santa Barbara
  833 F.2d 1270· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-22 ·cited 50×
  The panel opinion incorrectly held that a city rent control ordinance constituted a physical taking compensable under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
• NEW Port Largo, Inc. v. Monroe Cnty.
  985 F.2d 1488· 11th Cir.· 1993-03-17 ·cited 49×
  New Port Largo, Inc. (NPL) challenged Monroe County's rezoning of its property to private airport use, which the state court invalidated in 1986. NPL sold the property in 1982, before the state court's final judgment, and later filed federal takings claims in 1987. The Eleventh C
• Hohri v. United States
  782 F.2d 227· D.C. Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 48×·via Takings Claim
  The court held that it has appellate jurisdiction over the case and that the Tucker Act waives sovereign immunity for Takings Clause and contract claims, but not for other monetary claims.
• Jackson Sawmill Co., Inc. v. The United States
  580 F.2d 302· 8th Cir.· 1978-07-12 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the bondholders' claims for inverse condemnation and impairment of contract were properly dismissed, as they failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Jacobson v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency
  566 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1977-12-21 ·cited 47×
  The court held that while a cause of action for inverse condemnation against the TRPA fails due to lack of condemnation authority, a due process claim under the Fifth Amendment is stated. The TRPA is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment unless immunity is waived, and off
• Drakes BAY Land Co. v. The United States
  424 F.2d 574· Ct. Cl.· 1970-04-17 ·cited 46×·via Claim For Just Compensation Under The Fifth Amendment
  The court held that the government's actions, including its influence on local authorities and its acceptance of a deed intended to block a road project, constituted a taking of the plaintiff's entire property, entitling them to just compensation.
• The Hoopa Valley Tribe v. The United States
  596 F.2d 435· Ct. Cl.· 1979-03-21 ·cited 44×
  The Court of Claims affirmed the trial judge's decision, denying the plaintiff's motion to retransfer and granting the defendant's motion to dismiss. The court found that the claims were barred by res judicata and that the Court of Claims had exclusive jurisdiction over the monet
• Richmond Elks Hall Ass'n v. Richmond Redev. Agency & the City of Richmond
  561 F.2d 1327· 9th Cir.· 1977-09-30 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the Agency's actions constituted a de facto taking of Elks' property by inverse condemnation, requiring just compensation. It also held that Elks was not entitled to litigation expenses under federal or state law.
• R. J. Widen Co. v. The United States & Commonwealth OF Mass.
  357 F.2d 988· Ct. Cl.· 1966-03-18 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the government's actions constituted a taking of plaintiff's real estate and water rights, for which compensation has been paid, but that incidental damages to personal property and business were not compensable under the Fifth Amendment. The court also awarde
• Dino Bello v. Walker
  840 F.2d 1124· 3d Cir.· 1988-03-01 ·cited 42×
  Municipal officials' deliberate and arbitrary abuse of power to deny a building permit can violate substantive due process, but mere delays in issuing permits do not constitute an unconstitutional taking of property.
• Sierra Club v. Env't Prot. Agency
  540 F.2d 1114· D.C. Cir.· 1976-08-02 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the Clean Air Act requires the prevention of significant deterioration of air quality, affirming the EPA's regulations designed to achieve this. The court found the regulations to be rationally based, within the Administrator's authority, and constitutional.
• The Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. The United States
  390 F.2d 686· Ct. Cl.· 1968-02-16 ·cited 40×·via Claim For Just Compensation Under The Fifth Amendment
  The court held that the sale of certain reservation lands to homesteaders was not a Fifth Amendment taking because Congress acted in good faith to transmute land to money at full value, but the granting of school lands to North Dakota at an arbitrarily low price constituted a Fif
• Dep't OF Transp. v. Weisenfeld
  617 So. 2d 1071· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-03-26 ·cited 39×
  Summary judgment on liability for a temporary regulatory taking cannot be granted without evidence that a regulatory action deprived the owner of all or substantial economic use of the affected property. A regulation that goes too far may constitute a taking, but only if the owne
• Trustees FOR Alaska and Gilbert M. Zemansky v. Env't Prot. Agency
  749 F.2d 549· 9th Cir.· 1984-12-10 ·cited 39×
  The court held that expired permits could be reviewed under the 'capable of repetition, yet evading review' exception to mootness, and that EPA must establish effluent limitations necessary to meet water quality standards, but dismissed claims regarding rulemaking duty and burden
• Foster v. Herley
  330 F.2d 87· 6th Cir.· 1964-04-10 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the District Court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because the plaintiff's claim that the City's actions violated the Fourteenth Amendment presented a federal question.
• Couf v. Karleen DeBLAKER
  652 F.2d 585· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-07 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a federal cause of action based on the city's zoning decisions, as the state court's finding of procedural error did not equate to a finding of arbitrary or irrational zoning under federal law, and there was insufficient evid
• Black Hills Video Corp. & Midwest Video Corp. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  399 F.2d 65· 8th Cir.· 1968-08-07 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has the statutory authority and jurisdiction to regulate community antenna television (CATV) systems, including both microwave-fed and off-the-air systems, and that the promulgated rules are valid.
• Am. Power & Light Co. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  141 F.2d 606· 1st Cir.· 1944-03-17 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had the statutory authority to order the dissolution of subholding companies under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 if their structure unduly complicated the system or unfairly distributed voting power
• United States v. ONE Parcel OF Real Prop. With Bldgs.
  960 F.2d 200· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-12 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the forfeiture of Peter Beane's property was proper, and that Joel and Carol Beane were not entitled to attorney's fees under the EAJA because the government's actions were substantially justified.
• Hoehne v. Cnty. OF SAN Benito
  870 F.2d 529· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the landowners' federal claims were ripe because the county's actions, including legislative rezoning and denial of subdivision applications, demonstrated a final decision and futility in pursuing further administrative remedies.
• In re Chicago v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  799 F.2d 317· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 35×
  The court held that a district court's approval of a railroad asset sale, even if erroneous, can constitute a taking under the Fifth Amendment if the decision was not compelled by the regulatory system and diminished the property's value.
• United States v. Geophysical Corp. OF Alaska
  732 F.2d 693· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-02 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, its regulations, and permit provisions requiring data release and public disclosure are valid. It also found that collateral estoppel barred certain claims and that the permittees' challenges to data release and disclosur
• City OF S. Lake Tahoe v. Cal. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency
  625 F.2d 231· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 34×
• Southpark Square Ltd. v. City OF Jackson
  565 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-27 ·cited 34×
  The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's claim that the denial of a building permit constituted a taking was insubstantial and frivolous.
• Coates v. United States
  181 F.2d 816· 8th Cir.· 1950-05-04 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claim for damages resulting from the government's modification of the Missouri River fell within the "discretionary function" exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act, thus depriving the court of jurisdiction.
• A.A. Profiles, Inc. v. City OF FT. Lauderdale
  850 F.2d 1483· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-01 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the City's rezoning ordinance constituted a regulatory taking of the plaintiff's property without just compensation, and the case was ripe for adjudication because state remedies were inadequate.
• Woodland Mkt. Realty Co. v. City OF Cleveland
  426 F.2d 955· 6th Cir.· 1970-05-19 ·cited 32×
  A property owner whose property is adjacent to an urban renewal project cannot maintain an action for compensation under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments for depreciation in value caused by the project's establishment.
• Spencer v. Sheriff Jonathan Benison
  5 F.4th 1222· 11th Cir.· 2021-07-16 ·cited 31×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that Sheriff Benison was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority and that the plaintiff failed to present adequate evidence of a constitutional violation, thus reversing the denial of qualified immunity.
• United States v. Byrd
  609 F.2d 1204· 7th Cir.· 1979-10-15 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Corps of Engineers has the authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate activities in wetlands adjacent to intrastate lakes used by interstate travelers, and that the permit requirement does not constitute an uncompensated taking without exhaustion of a
• Nepco Mun. Rate Comm. & the Elec. Dep'ts & Plants of Ashburnham v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  668 F.2d 1327· D.C. Cir.· 1981-10-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that FERC permissibly excluded unamortized expenditures for cancelled projects from the rate base, allowed recovery over time, and properly treated investment tax credit funds by assigning them the overall rate of return.
• United States v. ONE 1975 Mercedes 280S
  590 F.2d 196· 6th Cir.· 1978-12-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that an unopposed affidavit showing probable cause of contraband in a vehicle is sufficient to support a summary judgment of forfeiture, even if the amount of contraband is small.
• Nat'l By-Products, Inc. v. The United States
  405 F.2d 1256· Ct. Cl.· 1969-01-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Government's representations regarding the construction of a right-bank levee did not constitute a binding contractual obligation due to a material misunderstanding of the parties' intentions and the lack of mutual assent on that specific issue.
• Deane Hill Country Club, Inc. v. City OF Knoxville & George F. McCanless
  379 F.2d 321· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a city annexation ordinance and its enabling state act were constitutional and that the plaintiff's claims were barred by res judicata.