“The Supreme Court said a Florida property owner may be owed compensation from a government agency that refused to award him a development permit for his land. The legal issue was whether the agency’s action constituted a ‘taking’ subject to compensation, under the so-called takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, in a more than 18-year battle by Koontz and his late father over their nearly 15-acre parcel of land. After Florida designated much of the parcel as protected wetlands, Koontz proposed to develop about a quarter of it and dedicate the rest for conservation, only to have local officials insist that he pay money to protect wetlands elsewhere.”
Related posts:
New York Banking Regulator Subpoenas Two Dozen Bitcoin Companies
TSA opens museum to inspire its mission
5-year-old kindergartner with pink bubble gun suspended from school
Utah Uses Eminent Domain to Seize Land of ... Uncle Sam
U.S. would welcome Modi as India leader despite past visa ban
Malta to ID buyers of its citizenship after outcry
Pentagon sends troops to Jordan to counter Syria chemical weapons threat
U.S. officers in Israel for military exercise
Companies turning again to stock buybacks to reward shareholders
How the US sent $12bn in cash to Iraq. And watched it vanish [2007]
India says not considering immediate gold import duty cut
Human rights group demands halt to live ammo use in Egypt
D.C. Campaign Becomes First To Accept Bitcoin Contributions
Swiss court rules handing over bank employee info to US illegal
Ranch House Near Reno is a Thriving Tax Haven, and It’s Not Alone