Home » Supreme Court Eminent Domain Case 09-381 Denied Without Opinion by James Constant
Supreme Court Eminent Domain Case 09-381 Denied Without Opinion James Constant

Supreme Court Eminent Domain Case 09-381 Denied Without Opinion

James Constant

Published August 8th 2013
ISBN :
ebook
Enter the sum

 About the Book 

1. The Fifth Amendment requires (1)that valuation and payment, with adjustments for rapid increases in property values and delays in payment, are made before taking of private property by government and (2)that owners cannot have property taken without the opportunity to conduct pre deprivation discovery necessary for the preparation of their defense to the taking. Pursuant to its quick action laws, the State of California (1)condemned private property without making valuation, payment and adjustments before taking private property and (2)condemned private property without affording owners the opportunity to conduct pre deprivation discovery necessary for the preparation of their defense to the taking.2. The Fourteenth Amendment requires a valid policy reason for the disparity between the State and private owner litigants. Californias quick action laws allow immediate possession of private property by the State and protracted litigation burden for the property owner.3. Californias quick action laws deprive property owners of their 5th Amendment rights for due process and just compensation and 14th Amendment right for equal treatment?