Claude
ChatGPT
PerplexityPenn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City
The ad hoc factors — economic impact, investment-backed expectations, character — for regulatory takings.
Practice Area Spotlight
Real Estate Litigation
Real estate litigators use Midpage to research takings and land-use disputes, title and easement claims, commercial lease and purchase-contract cases, foreclosure actions, and fair housing claims. The statutes, regulations, and case law behind that work are collected below.
How Real Estate Lawyers Use Midpage
Browse to see how Midpage works through real estate questions from real lawyers.
Commercial Lease Defaults & MitigationCompare the leading commercial states on a landlord’s duty to mitigate after tenant abandonment, including acceleration-clause enforceability.Specific Performance of Purchase ContractsCollect decisions granting or denying specific performance of commercial purchase-and-sale agreements, including time-of-the-essence and financing-contingency disputes.Easements by Necessity & PrescriptionFind decisions on the creation and scope of implied easements where a landlocked parcel’s access is disputed.Title Insurance Coverage DisputesFind decisions construing survey exceptions and the marketability covenant in owner’s title policies.Broker Commission LitigationAfter the NAR settlement, collect decisions addressing buyer-broker commission claims and procuring-cause disputes.Regulatory TakingsWhen does a zoning change become a regulatory taking? Summarize the Penn Central factors with recent examples.
Core Real Estate Collections
The statutes, regulations, agency materials, and courts behind real estate litigation.
Statutes
The federal statutes that recur in real estate disputes — alongside the state property codes where most claims live.
| Takings Clause Just compensation for public use — the basis of inverse-condemnation and regulatory-takings claims | U.S. Const. amend. V |
| Section 1983 — Deprivation of rights The federal vehicle for takings and land-use claims after Knick | 42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
| Section 1982 — Property rights of citizens Equal rights to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, and hold real and personal property | 42 U.S.C. § 1982 |
| RLUIPA — Religious land use Substantial-burden and equal-terms limits on zoning of religious exercise | 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc |
Regulations
The CFR parts implementing HUD, CFPB, and EPA rules that drive real estate claims.
| HUD — Fair housing regulations Prohibited practices in sale, rental, financing, and accessibility — including the § 100.500 discriminatory-effects framework | 24 CFR Part 100 |
| HUD — Complaint processing FHA complaints, investigation, and conciliation before HUD | 24 CFR Part 103 |
Agency Decisions & Guidance
HUD and CFPB materials that shape real estate claims and defenses.
| HUD — Fair housing guidance FHEO guidance behind accommodation, screening, and discriminatory-effects disputes | Guidance |
| CFPB — Advisory opinions Interpretive opinions under Regulation X, Regulation Z, and the FCRA | Guidance |
Courts & Tribunals
The forums where real estate disputes are heard — state courts carry most of the volume.
| Appellate U.S. Supreme Court; all 13 federal circuits; state supreme and appellate courts nationwide |
| Trial State trial courts — title, lease, foreclosure, lien, and land-use dockets; U.S. District Courts for takings, FHA, CERCLA, and diversity contract claims; U.S. Court of Federal Claims for federal takings |
Key Cases
The controlling authorities — linked to full text, treatment, and citing decisions in Midpage.
Nollan v. California Coastal Comm’n
Permit conditions must bear an essential nexus to the government’s purpose.
Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
Regulations eliminating all economically beneficial use are per se takings.
Dolan v. City of Tigard
Exactions must be roughly proportional to the development’s impact.
Kelo v. City of New London
Economic development can be a “public use” — triggering state-law reform nationwide.
Texas Dep’t of Housing v. Inclusive Communities Project
Disparate-impact claims are cognizable under the FHA, with a robust causality requirement.
Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans
TILA rescission is effected by written notice within three years — no suit required.
Murr v. Wisconsin
The multifactor test for defining the relevant parcel in regulatory takings analysis.
Bank of America Corp. v. City of Miami
Cities are “aggrieved persons” under the FHA, but must show proximate cause.
Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP
Nonjudicial foreclosure firms are generally not “debt collectors” under the FDCPA’s primary definition.
Knick v. Township of Scott
Property owners may sue in federal court under § 1983 without first exhausting state-court remedies.
Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid
A regulation granting physical access to private property is a per se physical taking.
Sackett v. EPA
CWA jurisdiction covers only wetlands with a continuous surface connection to covered waters.
Tyler v. Hennepin County
Retaining surplus equity from a tax-foreclosure sale is a taking.
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado
Nollan/Dolan scrutiny applies to legislatively imposed permit conditions, including impact fees.
DeVillier v. Texas
Flooding-damage claimants could pursue compensation through Texas’s inverse-condemnation cause of action.
Pung v. Isabella County
A procedurally sound public auction satisfies Tyler — no liability for the gap between auction price and fair market value.