Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City [1978]
438 U.S. 104 (1978) · Supreme Court of the United States · United States
Issue
Did the landmark law effect a regulatory taking?
Held
No. The regulation did not go too far under an ad hoc balancing approach.
Exam use
Review the ratio and reasoning before applying this case in problem questions.
Summary
Primary multi-factor regulatory takings test.
Facts
Issue
Did the landmark law effect a regulatory taking?
Held
No. The regulation did not go too far under an ad hoc balancing approach.
Ratio Decidendi
Regulatory takings are often assessed by economic impact, expectations, and character of government action.
Reasoning
Essay-Ready Explanation Generator
Version 1 of 4
Reference to Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (438 U.S. 104 (1978)) strengthens a property law answer because the case reflects the principle that Regulatory takings are often assessed by economic impact, expectations, and character of government action. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Did the landmark law effect a regulatory taking? 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.
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.