Cannone v. Noey
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MATTHEWS, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC” or “State”) petitioned for review of a ruling by the superior court that an administrative decision, subsequently overturned as arbitrary, per se establishes a temporary taking. The superior court held that under the Alaska and United States Constitutions, a temporary taking had occurred, and therefore the property owners were entitled to just compensation. We reverse.
II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Stephen Noey, Helen Noey, and Pac-Rim Financial Services, a partnership (collectively referred to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- PruneYard Shopping Center v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Balough v. Fairbanks North Star BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- Landgate, Inc. v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Beluga Mining Co. v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 1999
- R & Y, INC. v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Clay County Ex Rel. County Commission of Clay v. Harley & Susie Bogue, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1999
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.