Legal Opinion
Thompson v. Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided July 28, 1980No. Civ. 78-642PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAVID S. PORTER, Senior District Judge: *
Plaintiff, Philip D. Thompson [“Thompson”] brought this inverse condemnation action against the Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District [“the District”] to recover damages of $58,846 for an alleged taking of Thompson’s property without just compensation in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article I Section 18 and Article XI Section 4 of the Constitution of Oregon.
Specifically, Thompson complains that the District’s filing of an eminent domain action to obtain property owned by him caused…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Annicelli v. Town of South KingstownSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1983
- Urbanizadora Versalles, Inc. v. Miguel A. Rivera RiosCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1983
- Bosteve Ltd. v. MarauszwkiDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1986
- Philip D. Thompson v. Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Windward Partners, a Registered Hawaii Partnership v. George Ariyoshi, Governor of the State of HawaiiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.