The “Full Bore” Application of Hamilton Bank

Abstract

Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank 54 U.S.L.W. 4782, 106 S. Ct. 2561 (1986), many commentators predicted that only with great difficulty could landowners successfully challenge local government regulations on Fifth Amendment taking issue grounds, let alone successfully persuade federal courts that compensation was due for such regulatory takings as could be proved.¹ Not only did the Court appear to cast some doubt on the continued viability of the “notion” that regulations that went “too far” were protected by the Fifth Amendment, but the Stevens concurrence argued forcefully for a remedy other than compensation in the event a regulatory taking were found. Moreover, the main thrust of that opinion—that government must reach a “final decision” on the landowner's applications for development before a federal court could determine whether property value was sufficiently depressed to consider a regulatory taking—suggested that many lawsuits would be dismissed because they were not yet “ripe” for decision.