Dolan v. City of Tigard [1994]
512 U.S. 374 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States
Issue
Whether the conditions must be roughly proportional to the impact of the development.
Held
Yes; the city must make an individualized determination that the condition is roughly proportional.
Exam use
Summary
Whether the conditions must be roughly proportional to the impact of the development.
Facts
Issue
Whether the conditions must be roughly proportional to the impact of the development.
Held
Yes; the city must make an individualized determination that the condition is roughly proportional.
Ratio Decidendi
Exactions imposed as conditions on development permits must be roughly proportional in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development.
Reasoning
Essay-Ready Explanation Generator
Version 1 of 4
Reference to Dolan v. City of Tigard (512 U.S. 374) strengthens a State and Local Government Law answer because the case reflects the principle that Exactions imposed as conditions on development permits must be roughly proportional in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Whether the conditions must be roughly proportional to the impact of the development. The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.
Underlying Concepts
- state-and-local-government-law
- State and Local Government Law
- Unconstitutional conditions and rough proportionality
- case authority
- exam application
Significance
Related Cases
No related cases listed.
Exam Tips
Revision Checklist
- Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
- State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
- Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
- Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.