? Eminent domain is a hotly contested topic in the United States. Typically, opponents see it as an unjust taking by the government, and supporters state it is needed to serve the public interest. This week, research a recent example of Eminent Domain cases or issues, and discuss the merits and implications.
Additionally, border walls and the construction of such walls is a highly polarized issue right now. Regardless of its merit, the topic does bring up an interesting legal question when using eminent domain. Discuss if you believe, based on the law, using eminent domain is allowable for the construction of border walls.
Lastly, have you or anyone in your family ever experienced an eminent domain taking at the local, state or federal level? If so, what was the outcome
? the government can enact the concept of eminent domain and take private property so long as it is for the public use and the owner is justly compensated. This concept is hotly contested and often results in a clash between property owners and the government. Developers and businesses generally like the concept of eminent domain and really attempt to stretch the term public use in order to expand business. In 2005 the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided in Kelo v. New London by a narrow margin of 5-4 that city’s taking of private property to sell for private development qualified as a “public use” within the meaning of the takings clause.
please explain why the court got this correct AND explain why the court was wrong. Lastly, if you were the 10th justice how would you vote and why?
This link should provide you with details on the case: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2004/04-108
Click on the left hand side under Opinions for full details.
? discusses some of the rights and duties of landlords and tenants.
- Do you think the law does enough to protect tenants from landlords? What about protecting landlord from tenants?
- What laws are there protecting tenants (or landlords) in your state?
? Steve is renting a property from Billy. One evening Steve tripped and fell down the stairs. The issue is that one of the stairs in the common area was faulty. Billy knew about the stair, but he had never got around to fixing it.
Steve injured his leg, so he decided to return to his room. The heater was not working (and it was in the middle of winter). Steve had told Billy about the faulty heater for months, but Billy never got around to fixing it. There is a local ordinance that requires landlords to repair heaters. Additionally, assume that this jurisdiction includes the implied warranty of habitability. The jurisdiction recognizes constructive eviction, and it follows the majority rule of when landlords are liable for injuries.
- What causes of action does Steve have?
- What remedies does he have for the faulty heater?