The Demise of Federal Takings Litigation

Sterk, Stewart E.

Journal: William & Mary Law Review

Volume: 48

First Page: 251

Year: 2006

Bluebook Citation: 48 WM. & MARY L. REV. 251 (2006)

Author: Stewart E. Sterk: all 33 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
2
Citing decisions
2
Courts citing

Citations by decade

1
1
2000s2010s

Courts citing this journal article

6th Cir.1
U.S.1
Most recently cited by2

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

For more than twenty years the Supreme Court has held that a federal takings claim is not ripe until the claimant seeks compensation in state court. The Court's recent opinion in San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City & County of San Francisco establishes that the federal full faith and credit statute applies to federal takings claims. The Court itself recognized that its decision limits the availability of a federal forum for takings claims. In fact, however, claim preclusion doctrine-not considered or discussed by the Court-may result in more stringent limits on federal court review of takings claims than the Court's opinion anticipates.

The counterintuitive result-that federal takings claims must be litigated in state court-plays a critical role in the Supreme Court's emerging takings jurisprudence, which largely delegates to state courts the primary responsibility for policing land use regulation.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.