Legal Opinion

April v. City of Broken Arrow

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided July 12, 1989No. 66469PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLIN, Justice.

The question presented is whether the adoption of two municipal land-use ordinances on their face substantially interfered with landowner’s use and enjoyment of his property so as to constitute a permanent “taking” of property without just compensation in violation of the United States and Oklahoma Constitutions. 1 Put another way, the question is, does a taking result if the limitations on the use of owner’s property do “not substantially advance legitimate state interests, or denies an owner economical, viable use of his land, [citations omitted].” 2

I

Appellee Paul April,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. McKart v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  4. Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Blue Circle Cement, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of RogersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
  2. Stites v. DUIT Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  3. Red Rock Mental Health v. RobertsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
  4. United Airlines, Inc. v. State Board of EqualizationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990
  5. Calhoun v. City of DurantCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1997

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API