Legal Opinion
Thomas Dodd and Doris Dodd v. Hood River County, an Oregon Municipal Corporation, and State of Oregon, Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 29, 1995No. 93-35207PublishedCited by 150 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge ALDISERT; Dissent by Judge TANG.
ALDISERT, Circuit Judge.
This appeal requires us first to decide whether the district court erred in dismissing for lack of ripeness the Fifth Amendment taking claim brought by Appellants Thomas and Doris Dodd, owners of real estate in Hood River County, Oregon. If we conclude that the issue is now ripe for decision, we must then decide what contentions may now be met on the merits, and if so, whether we should meet the merits or permit the District Court to do so in the first instance. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in part and…
2Cases cited62 opinions
- Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Migra v. Warren City School District Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by150 opinions
- Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of KentuckyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Shanks v. DresselCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Kolela Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical SystemsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- America Unites for Kids v. Sylvia RousseauCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- Satinder S. Rekhi v. Wildwood Industries, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
145 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.