KMST, LLC. v. County of Ada
Idaho Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
EISMANN, Justice.
This is an appeal alleging that the requirements that a developer construct a public street and pay impact fees constituted an unconstitutional taking of the developer’s property. The district court entered judgment for the respondent, holding that the requirement to construct a street was not an unconstitutional taking and that the impact fees were properly calculated. We affirm the judgment of the district court on different grounds, holding that there was no taking with regard to the dedication of the street and that the appellant failed to exhaust administrative remedies…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- State v. ZichkoIdaho Supreme Court · 1996
- King v. KingIdaho Supreme Court · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Sefzik v. City of McKinney, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2006
- Department of Health and Welfare v. DoeIdaho Supreme Court · 2010
- Lochsa Falls, L.L.C. v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 2009
- BHA Investments, Inc. v. City of BoiseIdaho Supreme Court · 2004
- Kelley v. YadonIdaho Supreme Court · 2011
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.