Legal Opinion

Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 27, 1997No. 96-243PublishedCited by 411 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Souter

Petitioner Bernadine Suitum owns land near the Nevada shore of Lake Tahoe. Respondent Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, which regulates land use in the region, determined that Suitum’s property is ineligible for development but entitled to receive certain allegedly valuable “Transferable Development Rights” (TDR’s). Suitum has brought an action for compensation under Rev. Stat. § 1979, 42 U. S. C. § 1983, claiming that the agency’s determinations amounted to a regulatory taking of her property. While the pleadings raise issues about the significance of the TDR’s both to the claim that a taking…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by411 opinions

  1. Mayhew v. Town of SunnyvaleTexas Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning AgencySupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  3. Palazzolo v. Rhode IslandSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  4. Knick v. Township of ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
  5. Perry v. Del RioTexas Supreme Court · 2001

406 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