<i>Palazzolo, Lucas</i>, and <i>Penn Central</i>: The Need for Pragmatism, Symbolism, and Ad Hoc Balancing

I. Two Perspectives on Opinions: Symbolic and Managerial II. Penn Central and the Ad Hoc Balancing Approach: Pragmatic Triumph of Symbol ... A. Reasons for Approach: Complexity and Lack of Independent Definition of Property ... B. Effects of Approach: Delegation and Uncertainty III. Lucas and the Categorical Total Takings Test: Symbol in the Guise of Managerial Categories ... A. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council … B. Vagueness of the Test ... 1. Recognition of Problems in Lucas … 2. Treatment of Problems in Lucas … a. Summary ... b. Preexisting Rights and Limits ... C. Narrowness of the Test .... D. Conclusion: Symbolic Nature of the Test IV. Impact of the Total Takings Test: Managerial Failure as a Result of Uncertainty and Limited Effect ... A. Cases Illustrating Treatment of Issues Raised by Test ... 1. Denominator Problems ... 2. Value of Permitted Uses ... 3. Pre-existing Rights and Limits ... a. Approaches ... b. Discussion ... B. Case Study: South Carolina ... C. Random Selection of Cases Citing Lucas V. Palazzolo v. Rhode Island: The Limits of Categorical Tests and Advantages of Ad Hoc Balancing ... A. Facts and Procedural History ... B. Supreme Court Decision ... C. Impact VI. Conclusion