Legal Opinion
Thomas Dodd Doris Dodd v. Hood River County, and State of Oregon, Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 13, 1998No. 97-35124PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALDISERT, Circuit Judge:
This latest chapter of the long-running state and federal judicial saga in the zoning controversy between Thomas and Doris Dodd on one side and Hood River County and the State of Oregon on the other requires us to decide whether the Dodds are entitled to compensation under the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause that was denied them in previous state court and agency proceedings involving takings under Article I, section 18 of the Oregon Constitution. The district court denied them relief. We affirm the judgment of the district court, albeit for different reasons.
In…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Ralph E. Thornton Cheryl A. Thornton v. City of St. Helens Warren Baker Brian LittleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of KentuckyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Carrie Ann Montero v. Agco Corporation, Glenn Carpenter, and Russ NewmannCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Hacienda Valley Mobile Estates, a California Limited Partnership v. City of Morgan Hill City of Morgan Hill Rent Review Opinion CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Carpinteria Valley Farms, Ltd. v. County of Santa BarbaraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.