News & Analysis as of

Nollan v California Coastal Commission Impact Fees

Best Best & Krieger LLP

Court of Appeal Upholds Traffic Impact Fee Post-Sheetz: Class-Based Development Fees Can Survive Takings Scrutiny

The United States Supreme Court’s April 12, 2024 decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado unanimously rejected longstanding California precedent. The Court’s decision further solidified that fees imposed as a condition of...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Sheetz and Takings Law Revisited

El Dorado County Traffic Development Fee Survives Scrutiny on Remand - Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, 144 S.Ct. 893 (2024), which held that the Takings Clause applies to...more

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Supreme Court Impact Fee Decision Creates Opportunities for Developers and Property Owners

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that may significantly affect how development impact fees are assessed in California. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the Court unanimously held that...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Permit Conditions and Impact Fees Subject of Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decision

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court in April 2024 issued a unanimous decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California (144 S. Ct. 893), concluding that the "Takings Clause" in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies to...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

US Supreme Court Decision Invites Scrutiny of Legislatively Imposed Impact Fees

Latham & Watkins LLP on

The unanimous opinion holds that development impact fees established through the legislative process are subject to constitutional scrutiny as potential regulatory takings. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Rules Legislative Permit Conditions Not Exempt From Nollan/Dolan Scrutiny

Perkins Coie on

In a dispute over a traffic impact fee imposed on a residential building permit by El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the long-standing position of California and other state courts that the Takings...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Sets Stage for Widespread Challenges to Real Estate Development Impact Fees

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 12, 2024, that the "Takings Clause" enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies equally to legislative and administratively imposed land use permitting fees. Since...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

SCOTUS Moves On Sheetz: Development Impact Fees Imposed By Legislation Must Pass Takings Scrutiny

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court delivered its highly-anticipated opinion in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, unanimously holding that fees imposed through legislative action as a condition of property...more

Saiber LLC

SCOTUS Asked to Clarify the Scope of Constitutional Challenges to Land Use Permit Conditions

Saiber LLC on

In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, when George Sheetz sought a building permit to construct a single-family residence, the County of El Dorado agreed to issue the permit with one important condition: he had to pay...more

Miller Starr Regalia

The Mitigation Fee Act Provides the Sole Means for Challenging Development Impact Fees and Recovering Interest

Miller Starr Regalia on

The Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code § 66000 et seq.) provides the requirements for development impact fee programs. Most of the Act’s provisions were adopted in 1987 as AB 1600 and are sometimes referred to as “AB 1600...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide