Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

 There is no specific guidance on how to identify the relevant parcel for the regulatory taking inquiry.  there are two concepts which the Court has indicated can be unduly narrow. The Court has declined to limit the parcel in an artificial manner to the portion of property targeted by the challenged regulation. In Penn Central, for example, the Court rejected a challenge to the denial of a permit to build an office tower above Grand Central Terminal. The Court refused to measure the effect of the denial only against the “air rights” above the terminal, cautioning that “‘[t]aking’ jurisprudence does not divide a single parcel into discrete segments and attempt to determine whether rights in a particular segment have been entirely abrogated.” 438 U. S., at 130, 98 S. Ct. 2646, 57 L. Ed. 2d 631.

In a similar way, in Tahoe-Sierra, the Court refused to “effectively sever” the 32 months during which petitioners’ property was restricted by temporary moratoria on development “and then ask whether that segment ha[d] been taken in its entirety.” 535 U. S., at 331, 122 S. Ct. 1465, 152 L. Ed. 2d 517. That was because “defining the property ...

Register or login to access full content