U.S. Supreme Court,
Environmental & Energy,
Constitutional Law
Jan. 31, 2018
Endangered species case: critical habitat or regulatory taking?
The designation of private property as necessary habitat for some endangered species or other must actually be supported by evidence and must actually serve the intended purpose.
Michael M. Berger
Senior Counsel
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP
2049 Century Park East
Los Angeles , CA 90067
Phone: (310) 312-4185
Fax: (310) 996-6968
Email: mmberger@manatt.com
USC Law School
Michael M. Berger is senior counsel at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP, where he is co-chair of the Appellate Practice Group. He has argued four takings cases in the U.S. Supreme Court.
OCTOBER 2017 TERM / TAKINGS TALK
Every now and then we have to wonder about the way that government operates. Some of us (at least) like to believe that the judiciary serves a function and that decisions of courts of precedent -- particularly those at the top of the judicial pyramid -- are entitled to due respect. Take, for example the idea that a phony designation of private property as necessary habitat for some endangered species or other m...
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?
Sign In