Legal Opinion · Concurrence

McCarthy v. City of Cleveland

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided November 9, 2010No. 09-4149Published

1ConcurrenceMcKEAGUE, Circuit Judge

I concur in the majority opinion in all respects. I write separately merely to highlight a second reason why Plaintiffs’ payment of their traffic fines does not constitute a “taking.” In order to demonstrate that the City committed a taking, Plaintiffs must allege and show that payment of their citations was involuntary. Yee v. City of Escondido, Cal., 503 U.S. 519, 527, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 118 L.Ed.2d 153 (1992) (“the Takings Clause requires compensation if the government authorizes a compelled invasion of property”). As the City clearly issued the citations and Plaintiffs paid the required…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Yee v. City of EscondidoSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Elena Herrada v. City of DetroitCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
  4. Dickson & Campbell, L.L.C. v. City of ClevelandOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
  5. Williams v. Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009

1 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