Mt. Laurel Case Study
On the date August 2nd 2005, regarding the court case: Mount Laurel Township vs. MiPro Homes L.L.C., the Appellate Division of Superior Court reversed the ruling of a trial Court. The trial court entered an injunction – preventing actions against MiPro Home’s 16.3-acre parcel and dismissing Mount Laurel’s case. The ruling by the Appellate Division of Superior Court was later affirmed by the New Jersey Supreme court, and the United States Supreme Court. The Appellate Division adjudicated that Mount Laurel Township had not improperly exercised eminent domain in condemning the 16.3-acre parcel. Was Mount Laurel justified in confiscating private land because the municipality did not want a 23 single-home development on the MiPro site, and would …show more content…
To answer the first question, the Appellate Division cited the Green Acre statutes, the Municipal Trust Fund Act, and the Garden State Preservation Act. From these statutes, the court declared that it’s in the publics’ best interest to set aside land for future recreational use, and to help curb congestion and pollution problems. But this does not answer the question, if eminent domain is applicable in this case. In the second question, the court had no problem with whether the plan was dedicated to open space use as, this was an issue of eminent domain not zoning. Lastly, the third question coincides with the first question. This particular inquiry is now the base question of many eminent domain cases, that is, whether the entity claiming eminent domain is acting in good faith. A blanket statement of the decision is: if the entity has a personal gain from the decision, then eminent domain does not apply, but if the entity will receive no personal gain and is for the good of the public, then eminent domain is applicable in the proper circumstances. Seeing that the municipality did not have ill intentions and seek personal gain, the Appellate Division entered a per curiam in favor of Mount Laurel Township on August 2nd, 2005 (Meislik&Meislik, 2006). The case was later heard by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, which
A Case Of Montanile V. Board Of Trustees Of The National Elevator Company
468 Words | 2 Pagesappropriate equitable relief . . . to enforce . . . the terms of the plan.” The Board sought an equitable lien on any settlement funds or property in Montanile's possession and an order enjoining Montanile from dissipating any such funds.
Discussion Board Forum 2 Case Summary
1187 Words | 5 PagesDiscussion Board Forum 2 Case Study Martin has decided to retire after he spent many years as a deputy police officer in a small town in North Carolina and as a detective in Raleigh. During his years as an officer of the law and order, he deiced to invest in some properties in the state. One of the properties is in the blue ridge mountains in North Carolina and the other real estate is on the North Carolina coast. The real property at the mountain was purchased 31 years ago as a joint tenancy with a right of survivorship with his friends. The second property located on the North Carolina coast is been taken by eminent domain by city authorities to make space for new development and business around the area.
Babbitt V Sweet Home Case Study
221 Words | 1 PagesName of the case: Babbitt V. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Citation: 515 US 687 (1995) Parties and their roles: BRUCE BABBITT, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, et al., PETITIONERS v. SWEET HOME CHAPTER OF COMMUNITIES FOR A GREAT OREGON et al. Facts: The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) makes it unlawful for any person to “take” endangered or threatened species, and defines “take” to mean, among other things, “harass, harm, pursue, wound, or kill.” In 1975, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) issued a regulation defining harm to include “significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife.” Issues: Does
Supreme Court Case: Marbury V. Madison, 1803
700 Words | 3 PagesThe year after legislature voided the land grant and stated that all rights and ownership of that land was considered invalid. John Peck purchased land in this territory in 1800 and in 1803 he re-sold this land to Robert Fletcher and stating that the previous sales of the land were legal and legitimate. Fletcher created this case with the claim that Peck selling this land to him was illegal and against the law. The court ruled that Peck selling this land was legal and legitimate claiming that the court could not declare contracts from previous legislative acts invalid and was
Eminent Domain Summary
874 Words | 4 PagesOne of the owners being forced from his property stated, “If the use of the property was going to a hospital or school we wouldn’t love to leave our home, but we would understand. But the idea that they’re taking peoples homes to bestow a benefit on a developer, which is the purpose of these takings isn’t right”(Fox on Atlantic Yards). The Atlantic yard homeowners are being forced off the property to build multiple projects including new basketball complex and other buildings on the property. Libertarians would once again agree that no one should be forced from property that belongs to them, but fair market conservatives would also somewhat agree. The idea of just using eminent domain because the state can is an unjust practice.
Thomas Jefferson Unconstitutional
279 Words | 2 PagesWhile the supporters of Thomas Jefferson believe that buying foreign land was necessary, those who are against him feel that what he did was unconstitutional. In the source, “Thomas Jefferson to John Breckinridge, 12 August 1803”, the text explains that what Jefferson did was allowed, as it had not mentioned that he couldn’t in the constitution. This controversy is huge, because some people believe that he did not have the right to do so. Jefferson made a point that it wasn’t mentioned in the constitution, so he decided to ratify it and pay for it. Some believe congress did not have the right to authorize this decision.
Arguments Against Homesteadism
189 Words | 1 PagesThis Homestead Act they are more in the public land they able to see they would able help those small farmers. In them own opposition
Economic And Political Problems During The Articles Of Confederation
1221 Words | 5 PagesIt divided the Northwest Territory into townships 6x6 miles each. Each township divided into 36 sections of 640 acres each. Each section was auctioned off for at least $1 (Over $200 USD present-day). Congress used this to pay off the Revolutionary War’s debt. Land speculators used this opportunity to gain large amounts of land, and land speculators were considered sinful.
Frederick Jackson Turner Frontier Thesis
718 Words | 3 PagesFor instance, the National Reclamation and Homestead
Lakota Creation Myth
1127 Words | 5 PagesIn the 103 years separating the confiscation of the Black Hills and the Supreme Court decision that it was illegal, the Lakota battled for the reclamation of the Black Hills in court cases and protests. They filed a claim in 1920 requesting the return of the Black Hills, but no action was taken. The American Indian Movement went to
Reconstruction Era Of Western Expansion
256 Words | 2 PagesUnder the Homestead Act westerners were provided up to 160 acres of land in which they would live and farm for five years before obtaining ownership of the land. Though five years was a rather substantial trade off, the land
Louisiana Purchase Essay
472 Words | 2 PagesWhy did we buy the land? France sold the land because they lost a war against England and had to sell the land for money. New Englanders taught it would be worst for the United States even though it increases the population, mining, and agriculture, and they get more land. They bought the land for 15 million dollars and it doubled the nation size. $11,250,000 was paid for by the United States and $3,750,000 was paid by the United States citizens.
Dbq Westward Expansion
568 Words | 3 PagesThis act by congress promised 160 acres of land to anyone who
What Features Did The New States Incorporate That Reflected Their Colonial Experience?
1199 Words | 5 PagesLand Ordinance of 1785 sold land that used to belong to the Indians, but was now the states. They divided the land into thirty-six sections and sold the 640 acres of land, one acre was no less than one dollar. This ordinance put money back into the hands of the congress, but some money went to schools in the new townships that were
The Pros And Cons Of Real Estate Laws
291 Words | 2 PagesThe laws of real estate depend completely on the state that you live in. The state that you reside in holds their own exclusive jurisdiction for all plots of land that are found within their state lines. The reason for this is because when the laws were put in place, many states offered different types of crops. The propositions in the law were put there so there was a clear view of the way each crop would be cultivated and distributed. While the states today don’t have these same reasons, they do still have control over how the land is owned.
More about Mt. Laurel Case Study
A Case Of Montanile V. Board Of Trustees Of The National Elevator Company
468 Words | 2 PagesDiscussion Board Forum 2 Case Summary
1187 Words | 5 PagesBabbitt V Sweet Home Case Study
221 Words | 1 PagesSupreme Court Case: Marbury V. Madison, 1803
700 Words | 3 PagesEminent Domain Summary
874 Words | 4 PagesThomas Jefferson Unconstitutional
279 Words | 2 PagesArguments Against Homesteadism
189 Words | 1 PagesEconomic And Political Problems During The Articles Of Confederation
1221 Words | 5 PagesFrederick Jackson Turner Frontier Thesis
718 Words | 3 PagesLakota Creation Myth
1127 Words | 5 PagesReconstruction Era Of Western Expansion
256 Words | 2 PagesLouisiana Purchase Essay
472 Words | 2 PagesDbq Westward Expansion
568 Words | 3 PagesWhat Features Did The New States Incorporate That Reflected Their Colonial Experience?
1199 Words | 5 PagesThe Pros And Cons Of Real Estate Laws
291 Words | 2 Pages