This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Zoning, Planning and Use

Jul. 14, 2006

County's Limits on Water Use Were Not a Taking of Property

Focus Column - In California's first comprehensive land-use taking case since the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 544 U.S. 528 (2005), an appellate court held that Imperial County's conditional use permit, which limited the amount of water Allegretti & Company could extract, did not constitute a physical or regulatory taking.

Focus Column

By Daniel J. Curtin Jr., Cecily T. Talbert and Bryan W. Wenter



In California's first comprehensive land-use taking case since the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 544 U.S. 528 (2005), an appellate court held that Imperial County's conditional use permit, which limited the amount of water Allegretti & Company could extract, did not constitute a physical or regulatory taking.

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up