This casenote examines the Supreme Court's struggle to reconcile its focus on the facial validity of a zoning ordinance with the traditional "taking" approach requiring diligent factual inquiry. While the Agins Court reiterates such an approach, the author notes the Court's departure from important constitutional and precedential considerations. The author offers a possible explanation for the departure, concluding that the Agins decision apparently makes plan submission a prerequisite for acknowledging economic loss and strongly implies a requirement of complete loss of all property value before a compensable taking will be recognized.
Agins v. City of Tiburon: Open Space Zoning Prevails - Failure to Submit Master Plan Prevents a Cognizable Decrease in Property Value,
8 Pepp. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol8/iss3/7