Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
| Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency | |
|---|---|
| Argued February 26, 1997 Decided May 27, 1997 | |
| Full case name | Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency |
| Docket no. | 96-243 |
| Citations | 520 U.S. 725 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 80 F.3d 359 (9th Cir. 1996) |
| Subsequent | 123 F.3d 1322 (9th Cir. 1997) |
| Questions presented | |
| 1. Whether providing TDRs as compensation for regulatory taking constitute a "final agency decision" by TRPA, thus enabling adjudication? 2. Must a property owner sell transferable development rights (TDRs) and apply for agency approval of the sale in order to ripen a takings claim under the Williamson County final decision requirement: a) when the regulatory agency has already conclusively determined that no viable use of her parcel of land will be permitted; b) when a TDR transfer will not allow her to make any use of her parcel of land; and c) when the maximum extent of TDRs available for transfer are already definite and certain, and can be valued by normal appraisal methods? | |
| Holding | |
| The United States Supreme Court's decision regarding the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency's determination on Suitum's property development eligibility established it as a “final agency decision”. This ruling resulted in Suitum's claim being considered ripe for adjudication. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Souter, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsburg, however, O'Connor, Scalia, and Thomas, joined except as to Parts II-B and II-C |
| Concurrence | Scalia, O’Connor, Thomas |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. V 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights | |
Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 520 U.S. 725 (1997), is a United States Supreme Court case pertaining to the regulatory authority of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) and its impact on private property rights. Bernadine Suitum owned a parcel of land near Lake Tahoe, which she intended to develop. However, TRPA imposed stringent regulations to protect the environment of the Lake Tahoe Basin. Under these regulations, Suitum was denied the permit to develop her property because it was classified as unsuitable for development based on the environmental criteria. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine the ripeness of Suitum's claim. The Court concluded that Suitum's takings claim was ripe for adjudication, emphasizing that Suitum was not required to attempt to sell her TDRs before her claim could be considered ripe. The Court based its reasoning on the immediate and direct impact of the regulatory action on her property rights, deeming further administrative actions unnecessary. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on February 26, 1997. Bernadine Suitum was represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation.