Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council - Significance, Impact, Coastal Zones And The Law Of The Sea
David H. Lucas
South Carolina Coastal Council
The South Carolina State Beachfront Management Act deprived the petitioner of profitable use of his property by prohibiting construction of new dwellings on his parcels. Thus, it must compensate the petitioner.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
A. Camden Lewis
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
C. C. Harness III
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia (writing for the Court), Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
29 June 1992
The Court ruled that the petitioner suffered a "taking;" his property was rendered "valueless" by South Carolina statute and he was thus entitled to "just compensation."
- Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887).
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (1922).
- Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980).
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304 (1987).
Jentleson, Bruce W. and Thomas G. Paterson, eds. Encyclopedia of U.S. Foreign Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
- FindLaw, Inc. Supreme Court Cases Online. http://laws.findlaw.com
- Hall, Kermit L., ed. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. Oxford University Press, 1992.
- Northwestern University. Oyez, oyez, oyez-A U.S. Supreme Court Database. http://court.it-services.nwu.edu/oyez/cases
- Inc. Madsen v. Women's Health Center - Significance, Standards Of Scrutiny, The Majority Opinion, Stevens Dissents In Part, Scalia Dissents
- Los Angeles Police Officers' Trials: 1992 1993 - A City In Flames, Textbook Tactics
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council - Significance
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council - Impact
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council - Coastal Zones And The Law Of The Sea
- Other Free Encyclopedias