Legal Opinion
City National Bank v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided August 8, 1995No. 93-249LPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
The matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment and plaintiffs motion in limine. The issue is whether plaintiffs1 failure to comply with the Comprehensive Development Master Plan for Metro-Dade County (the “Comprehensive Plan”), adopted by the Dade County Board of County Commissioners in 1988, forecloses his takings claim. Argument is deemed unnecessary.
FACTS
The material facts relevant to this dispute are set forth in City National Bank v. United States, 33 Fed.Cl. 224 (1995), which provisionally denied plaintiffs motion in limine, and ordered…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Order of Railroad Telegraphers v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Florida Rock Industries, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant v. The United States, Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Florida Rock Industries, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Levi Strauss & Co., Applicant/appellant v. Genesco, Inc., Opposer/appelleeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Applegate v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
- Good v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
- John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Forest Preserve District v. First National BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 2010
- Beekwilder v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.