174A Notes 4.24 - [email protected](6B Study guide Nolan v...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
[email protected].edu (6B Study guide) Nolan v CCC (1987) They spend hundreds of millions of dollars to protect beach people’s houses. A lawyer in West LA (he is an evil person). He buys a property almost on the beach, he can’t buy the beach b/c it belongs to the state of California. Do we let Mr. Nolan tear down their homes and replace it with his house? There is an entity called California Costa Commission, they will grant him a building permit if they approve his proposal. The commission says no to Mr. Nolan on tearing down the small home and building his home. They say no, he applies again, and then they said they’ll let him build the house if he puts up a sign that says “Beach Access here Tuesdays/Thursdays 9-5” this is called an easemont (a legal right to trespass under rigidly defined terms). The court deliberately perverted the distinction between taking property and regulating it. This is just a regulatory negotiation that involves the exchange of a property right. In 5-4, the court says you are taking
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 2

174A Notes 4.24 - [email protected](6B Study guide Nolan v...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online