Legal Opinion
Biafora v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided December 10, 2014No. 2013-5130, 2013-5134, 2013-5136, 2013-5139, 2013-5142, 2013-5144PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, Circuit Judge.
Appellants, owners of properties with mortgages insured by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), appeal from judgments of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing their various takings claims. For the reasons below, we affirm-in-part, reverse-in-part, and remand to the Court of Federal Claims for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Background
In the 1950s and ’60s, the federal government enacted legislation to encourage private developers to construct, own, and manage housing projects for low- and moderate-income…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- New York Central Railroad Company v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning AgencySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- John R. Sand & Gravel Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Cyprus Amax Coal Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Jones v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Anaheim Gardens, L.P. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Milgroom v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Jones v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Anaheim Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.