Hadacheck v. Sebastian
D. Benjamin Barros
Widener University - School of Law
Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-08
This short encyclopedia entry discusses Hadacheck v. Sebastian and its relevance to contemporary regulatory takings jurisprudence. The entry describes the Hadacheck litigation and the treatment of Hadacheck in the Supreme Court's more recent regulatory takings cases. It notes four reasons why caution should be used before applying Hadacheck to contemporary regulatory takings issues: (1) the case is ambiguous about the diminution in value actually suffered by the plaintiff; (2) Hadacheck was decided before Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon, which arguably marked a shift in regulatory takings law; (3) the Court's holding in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council that a total diminution in value is a per se taking undercuts one possible reading of Hadacheck; and (4) that the Court's recent decision in Lingle v. Chevron suggests that the substantive due process analysis in early cases like Hadacheck should not be a part of the regulatory takings analysis.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 7
Keywords: takings, just compensation, hadacheck, mahon, lucas, penn central
JEL Classification: K11working papers series
Date posted: January 25, 2008 ; Last revised: February 19, 2008
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.484 seconds