Abstract
I. Two Perspectives on Opinions: Symbolic and Managerial
II. Penn Central and the Ad Hoc Balancing Approach: Pragmatic Triumph of Symbol ... A. Reasons for Approach: Complexity and Lack of Independent Definition of Property ... B. Effects of Approach: Delegation and Uncertainty
III. Lucas and the Categorical Total Takings Test: Symbol in the Guise of Managerial Categories ... A. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council … B. Vagueness of the Test ... 1. Recognition of Problems in Lucas … 2. Treatment of Problems in Lucas … a. Summary ... b. Preexisting Rights and Limits ... C. Narrowness of the Test .... D. Conclusion: Symbolic Nature of the Test
IV. Impact of the Total Takings Test: Managerial Failure as a Result of Uncertainty and Limited Effect ... A. Cases Illustrating Treatment of Issues Raised by Test ... 1. Denominator Problems ... 2. Value of Permitted Uses ... 3. Pre-existing Rights and Limits ... a. Approaches ... b. Discussion ... B. Case Study: South Carolina ... C. Random Selection of Cases Citing Lucas
V. Palazzolo v. Rhode Island: The Limits of Categorical Tests and Advantages of Ad Hoc Balancing ... A. Facts and Procedural History ... B. Supreme Court Decision ... C. Impact
VI. Conclusion
Recommended Citation
F. Patrick Hubbard,
Palazzolo, Lucas, and Penn Central: The Need for Pragmatism, Symbolism, and Ad Hoc Balancing,
80 Neb. L. Rev.
(2001)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol80/iss3/3