Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (scotus)
Sheetz v. El Dorado County (Takings Clause)
- Autor: Vários
- Narrador: Vários
- Editora: Podcast
- Duração: 0:06:53
- Mais informações
Informações:
Sinopse
George Sheetz was required by the County of El Dorado to pay $23,420George Sheetz tried to get a residential building permit from El Dorado County. To do so, the County made him pay a $23,420 "traffic impact fee." The fee was part of the County's "General Plan" -- this plan was intended to address the impact that development has on public services. This fee was calculated based on a standard schedule, rather than any actual impact resulting from his development. Sheetz paid the fee under protest. He sued in state court, claiming that the fee amounted to an "exaction" that violated the Takings Clause. Sheetz argued that the Supreme Court's decisions in Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n and Dolan v. City of Tigard, require the County to make an individualized determination. The County argued that these cases only apply to individual decisions by administrators, but not by legislative bodies. Held: The Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative an