Hazleton Redevelopment Authority v. Hudock’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 26 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The developing expansion of the theory of constructive ‘taking’ — sometimes referred to as inverse condemnation and more recently in the case law as a de facto ‘taking’ — has been responsive to the reality that activities carried on incident to massive, complex and time consuming programs launched by government to solve some of the acute problems that beset our society may so substantially interfere with one’s use and enjoyment of his property as to constitute a compensable injury in a constitutional sense or as being within applicable statutory law, even though the power of eminent domain has not been formally exercised against the property in question and there has been no physical intrusion of it. (Emphasis in original.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Condemnation by City of Philadelphia of Leasehold of Airportels, Inc. · 496 F. Supp. 530 - Thompson v. Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District

2. “actions and activities did not in themselves deny to [plaintiff] a market for their property.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 128 N.J. Super. 448 - Freeman v. Paterson Redevelop. Agency