PropertyProf Blog

Editor: Stephen Clowney
Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Ohio Supreme Court Prohibits Economic Development Takings

The Ohio Supreme Court decided the Norwood case today.  I'm on the road and haven't read the full opinion yet, but Ilya Somin has a detailed post on it at the VC.

Ben Barros

[Comments are held for approval, so there will be some delay in posting]

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/property/2006/07/ohio_supreme_co.html

Recent Cases, Takings | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d834a3817753ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ohio Supreme Court Prohibits Economic Development Takings:

Comments

The NY TIMES article on the case can be found at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/27/us/27ohio.html

Note a certain fact in the case: all but three of the 70 homeowners sold voluntarily and have already been bulldozed. The holdouts, actually, represent a good argument for eminent domain as a last resort. The Ohio supreme court has just said that 1 homeowner now has veto power over any area-wide redevelopment effort. I repeat my argument made on previous posts that without eminent domain as a last resort tool for redevelopment, there is no way to solve the holdout problem and it confers on each property owner a super-property-right to veto any neighborhood improvments.

Posted by: Kurt Paulsen | Jul 29, 2006 9:52:36 AM

Post a comment