12 Cited authorities

Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City
438 U.S. 104 (1978) Cited 2,584 times 53 Legal Analyses
Holding prohibition on construction of fifty-five-story office tower over New York's Grand Central Terminal is not a regulatory taking
Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.
467 U.S. 986 (1984) Cited 1,063 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that Missouri law, which follows the Restatement of Torts, creates cognizable property right in trade secrets
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins
447 U.S. 74 (1980) Cited 726 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that "views expressed by members of the public" in a privately owned shopping mall "will not likely be identified with those of the owner"
Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
524 U.S. 156 (1998) Cited 381 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "interest income generated by funds held in IOLTA accounts [client accounts] is the `private property' of the owner of the principal"
Armstrong v. United States
364 U.S. 40 (1960) Cited 779 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that building material suppliers were entitled to compensation where a shipbuilder's contract with the government specifically showed that the shipbuilder retained title to the uncompleted ships during their construction, because the suppliers' lien interests in the building materials could attach while the contractor held title and the government's action in taking title then also took the suppliers' lien property interests
Penna. Coal Co. v. Mahon
260 U.S. 393 (1922) Cited 1,504 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that a ban on coal mining below homes to prevent their collapse is a taking
Hodel v. Irving
481 U.S. 704 (1987) Cited 169 times
Holding federal law regulating "descent and devise of Indian lands" violated the Takings Clause
Lynch v. United States
292 U.S. 571 (1934) Cited 676 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government could not avoid payment of its commitment to pay disability and life insurance by enacting a statute repealing the laws granting the benefit without committing a constitutional taking
Crocker v. Townsend Oil Co.
No. SJC-11059 (Mass. Dec. 17, 2012) Cited 77 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations runs from the time a plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the underlying harm for which relief is sought
Hoffman v. City of Warwick
909 F.2d 608 (1st Cir. 1990) Cited 66 times
Determining whether "language and circumstances" of Rhode Island benefits statute reveal "a legislative intent to create private contractual rights"

Awuah v. Coverall North America, Inc.,

12 Cited authorities

Holding prohibition on construction of fifty-five-story office tower over New York's Grand Central Terminal is not a regulatory taking

Holding that Missouri law, which follows the Restatement of Torts, creates cognizable property right in trade secrets

Holding that "views expressed by members of the public" in a privately owned shopping mall "will not likely be identified with those of the owner"

Holding that the "interest income generated by funds held in IOLTA accounts [client accounts] is the `private property' of the owner of the principal"

Holding that a ban on coal mining below homes to prevent their collapse is a taking

Holding federal law regulating "descent and devise of Indian lands" violated the Takings Clause

Holding that the government could not avoid payment of its commitment to pay disability and life insurance by enacting a statute repealing the laws granting the benefit without committing a constitutional taking

Holding that under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations runs from the time a plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the underlying harm for which relief is sought

Determining whether "language and circumstances" of Rhode Island benefits statute reveal "a legislative intent to create private contractual rights"