To constitute a taking under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, must a physical invasion also destroy or substantially impair an owner's economically beneficial uses of property?

QUESTION PRESENTED Conflicting with Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (1982), the Supreme Court of Nevada concluded that to prevail on a physical takings claim a property owner must show that a flood “effectually destroyled] or impair[ed] [the property’s] usefulness.” The question presented is: To constitute a taking under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, must a physical invasion also destroy or substantially impair an owner’s economically beneficial uses of property?