C O N L A W O U T L I N E O — W
I. The “Takings” Clause
a. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon (1922)
i. Holmes
1. Mahon owned surface of land, PCC owned land beneath it and rights to mine it. PA passed law stating that land beneath homes could not be mined for safety reasons.
2. Unconstitutional Regulatory taking b/c statute virtually took property rights to land beneath home b/c PCC could no longer mine it.
3. Factors to consider (Holmes)
a. Extent of interference with property
b. Extent of the public interest
c. Whether government is providing
i. Average reciprocity of advantage
i. Pros and Cons must be spread to everyone
ii. Limitation against you must be balanced w/ benefit you gain as member of general public.
ii. Examples
i. Can’t make loud noises at night
a. Limited, but have benefit of others not doing it
ii. Zoning
a. Everyone restricted, but everyone benefits
iii. But if really helpful to some, really harmful for others, there may be a taking
iv. Here, Holmes says everyone breaks even
ii. Brandies (Dissent)
1. Not a taking b/c gov. passed law in interest of public policy
a. Health, safety and welfare
b. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (1978) (5-4)
i. Brennan
1. PCT owned Grand Central Station in NYC. NY passed statute for historic landmark preservation. PCT wanted to build tower on top of GCS and strip away one façade.
2. Not a taking b/c only the rights to the air above GCS were limited.
a. But under Reciprocity of Advantage this is not so reciprocal.
i. Cost given to PCT and not spread over everyone
merely taking a “strand” from a “bundle” of property rights
d. Ruckleshaus v. Monsanto Co. (1984)
i. Blackmun
1. 3 types of property
a. Real
b. Personal
c. Intellectual—protected if state recognizes it as property
2. Regulation generally required Monsanto to disclose research.
3. Research contained health, safety and welfare data that EPA wanted, but was also valuable to future research
4. Are trade secrets property?
a. Ct. goes by the law of the state
b. MO has law saying that trade secrets are a form of property, so there can be a taking
c. Property rights to trade secrets exist to the extent that the owner protects his interests from disclosure
d. MO recognizes it as property, so there can be a taking
e. Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. (1982)
i. Marshall
1. Per Se Takings—no balancing test required
