Question

I’ve been planning to build a barn in my yard. Suppose the P. County Planning Commission passes a regulation that prohibits barn building because barns eventually get old and fall down, creating a public health hazard. If P. County condemns my land to build a highway through it, they must pay me Just Compensation for the Taking for a Public Purpose since they are using it now instead of me.

a) Does the barn regulation similarly amount to a Taking that would require P. County to pay me?

b) What does the Supreme Court Lucas Decision have to say about it?

Answer 1

a) Does the barn regulation similarly amount to a Taking that would require P. County to pay me?

Generally it would have seemed NO, but considering the final outcome of Supreme Court Lucas case, we must say, when state deters an owner of a property from using the property up to owner's wished purpose, it amounts to TAKING and it will require the state to release a just compensation for the property. In the given case, P. County has to pay.

b) What does the Supreme Court Lucas Decision have to say about it?

This case had a long history, including, at first, lower courts giving judgement in favor of Lucas (the owner of property under state seize), then Supreme Court reversing the order of lower court and dismising the lower court's award for compensation in favor of Lucas, then followed by a review petition filed by Lucas in Supreme Court itself, and then finally Supreme Court accepting that seize of property must amount to TAKING and Lucas deserved a just compensation from state.