Also known as: just compensations · eminent domain payment · takings compensation
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Payment by the government for private property taken for public use under the power of eminent domain. The amount equals the property's fair market value as determined by what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller.
Jonathan Jaffe owned a parcel the state needed for a new interstate. The state filed a condemnation action and paid him the appraised market value of the land. Jaffe accepted the payment and transferred title without further dispute.
Julia Jensen operated a nonconforming auto repair shop. The city adopted an amortization ordinance giving owners ten years to close. Jensen argued the period was too short given her recent investment and demanded just compensation for the forced termination.
June Jiang grew raisins subject to a federal marketing order. The government required her to surrender a portion of the crop to a reserve pool. Jiang sued for just compensation after the government took title to the raisins.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Jeanette Jensen purchased coastal land for development. A new state law barred all construction to protect dunes. Jensen claimed the regulation left the parcel without any economically beneficial use and sought just compensation.
Judy Jacobs sought a permit to rebuild her beachfront home. The coastal commission conditioned approval on granting a public easement across the dry sand. Jacobs challenged the condition as an uncompensated taking of property.
Jorge Juarez operated a printing business required by state law to produce flags for public schools. He claimed the mandate appropriated his equipment and labor without payment. Juarez sought just compensation for the compelled use of his property.
Just compensation equals the fair market value of the property taken, measured by the price a willing buyer would pay a willing seller in an arm's length transaction.
Supporting sources
No. The Takings Clause protects personal property as well. Government appropriation of crops or other chattels requires payment of just compensation.
Supporting sources
A regulation that denies a landowner all economically beneficial use of land constitutes a per se taking requiring just compensation unless background nuisance principles already prohibited the use.
Supporting sources
Yes. A permanent physical occupation authorized by government, even if small, is a per se taking that requires just compensation regardless of the public purpose served.
Supporting sources
Amortization ordinances must provide a reasonable period for phase-out. An unreasonably short period that effectively eliminates a vested property right without payment amounts to a taking requiring just compensation.
Supporting sources
…then sued in state court, claiming that the application of the Landmarks Law constituted a taking of their property without just compensation. The trial court upheld the law, but the Appellate Division reversed. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division and upheld the law. Held: The restrictions imposed by…