Legal Opinion
R & Y, INC. v. Municipality of Anchorage
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided September 7, 2001No. S-9315, S-9435PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EASTAUGH, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
Article I, section 18 of the Alaska Constitution provides that "[plrivate property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation." Did the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) "take" or "damage" property near Blueberry Lake in protected wetlands when it restricted development in a twenty-foot-wide setback band that began eighty feet from the lake's shoreline, decreasing the value of four of the landowners' lots? When the landowners sued the MOA claiming inverse condemnation, the trial court applied the relevant factors and held that…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- 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
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Mack Phillips v. Montgomery County, TennesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 2014
- K & K Const. Inc. v. DeqMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
- K & K Construction, Inc. v. Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
- Hageland Aviation Services, Inc. v. HarmsAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
- Varilek v. City of HoustonAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.