Statements (57)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:legal_case
|
| gptkbp:case_number |
No. 93-518
|
| gptkbp:case_significance |
gptkb:Constitution
gptkb:urban_planning gptkb:local_government gptkb:federal_government property law land use planning zoning laws constitutional law judicial review property rights legal precedents landowner rights government regulation local government powers court rulings property development land use policy constitutional protections land use conflicts land use disputes urban development policy land use law federal government authority public use doctrine state government authority landowner compensation development conditions exaction requirements government authority conflicts property compensation property development disputes property rights conflicts |
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:1994
5-4 ruling |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Stevens
gptkb:Justice_Ginsburg |
| gptkbp:doctrine |
essential nexus test
rough proportionality test |
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Dolan v. City of Tigard
|
| gptkbp:impact |
land use regulation
|
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:City_of_Tigard
Dolan |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
gptkb:512_U._S._374
|
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
gptkb:Oregon
|
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
government exactions
|
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
Takings Clause
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
City's conditions were unconstitutional
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:Nollan_v._California_Coastal_Commission
|
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Kennedy
|
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Kelo_v._City_of_New_London
gptkb:Nollan_v._California_Coastal_Commission |
| gptkbp:significance |
expanded property rights
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Justice_Society_of_America
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
5
|