This Note discusses the aftermath of the landmark case, Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agencey. This Comment first discusses the background of regulatory takings jurisprudence, from Justice Holmes' landmark Pennsylvania Coal opinion to the present. It further analyzes the recent Tahoe decision, focusing on both the strengths and weaknesses of the decision and its potential impact on the future of takings. Finally, the Comment offers a different analytical framework from which to analyze regulatory takings. Under this theory, courts would abandon the partial/total distinction, and instead focus on the actual loss from the landowner's point of view. Courts would apply a number of factors to guide their decision and must resist the temptation to adopt per se rules in the takings framework.
Robert W. DiUbaldo,
A Second Take: Re-Examining Our Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence Post-Tahoe,
30 Fordham Urb. L.J. 1949
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss6/4