Inverse Liability of the State of Wisconsin for a de facto "Temporary Taking" as a Result of an Administrative Decision: Zinn v. State
Alemante G. Selassie
Abstract
Open-access reader
Alemante G. Selassie
Abstract
Open-access reader
This Note examines Zinn v. State, a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, which held that plaintiff stated a claim for inverse condemnation against the State of Wisconsin when, as a result of an erroneous quasi-judicial decision by the DNR, plaintiff lost the use of her property for a little longer than a month. This Note takes the position that Zinn represents the growing tendency among courts to enlarge the scope of fact situations in which they will find a taking. Given this tendency, and given that the substantive test in Wisconsin of what constitutes a taking is identical whether a taking occurs as a result of the police power or power of eminent domain, this Note argues that the remedy of inverse condemnation should also be extended to police power takings when the latter produce the same benefits to the Government and cause the same harm to the property owner as would have occurred if the Government had used its power of eminent domain.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This Note examines Zinn v. State, a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, which held that plaintiff stated a claim for inverse condemnation against the State of Wisconsin when, as a result of an erroneous quasi-judicial decision by the DNR, plaintiff lost the use of her property for a little longer than a month. This Note takes the position that Zinn represents the growing tendency among courts to enlarge the scope of fact situations in which they will find a taking. Given this tendency, and given that the substantive test in Wisconsin of what constitutes a taking is identical whether a taking occurs as a result of the police power or power of eminent domain, this Note argues that the remedy of inverse condemnation should also be extended to police power takings when the latter produce the same benefits to the Government and cause the same harm to the property owner as would have occurred if the Government had used its power of eminent domain.
Key concepts: De facto, State (computer science), Liability, Business, Political science, Law, Law and economics, Sociology