Robbins v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
This case is before the court after argument on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The issue is whether the designation and/or delineation of plaintiffs’ property as jurisdictional wetlands — resulting in the recision of a private contract to sell the property — constitutes a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment.
FACTS
The following facts are undisputed, unless otherwise noted. Nancy A. and Edward W. Robbins (“plaintiffs”), own and reside on a 38.4-acre parcel of land in Paris, Tennessee (the “property”), which supports a house, barn, shed, and machine shop.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- R & Y, INC. v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Southwest Center for Biological Diversity v. BartelDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2006
- SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIV. v. BartelDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2006