No. 22-1048
Joseph E. Blackburn, Jr., et ux. v. Dare County, North Carolina, et al.
Response RequestedRelisted (2)
Tags: 5th-amendment civil-procedure constitutional-law due-process eminent-domain fifth-amendment government-regulation property-rights regulatory-takings takings takings-clause
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment Takings
FifthAmendment Takings
Latest Conference:
2023-10-06
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a governmental regulation prohibiting all physical access to a landowner's property is a 'per se' taking under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a governmental regulation prohibiting all physical access to a landowner’s property is a “per se” taking under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Docket Entries
2023-10-10
Petition DENIED.
2023-09-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2023.
2023-08-30
Brief of respondent Dare County, North Carolina in opposition filed.
2023-07-31
Response Requested. (Due August 30, 2023)
2023-06-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-04-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 30, 2023)
Attorneys
Dare County, North Carolina
James Redfern Morgan Jr. — Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Respondent
James Redfern Morgan Jr. — Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Respondent
Brian F. Castro — Womble Bond Dickson (US) LLP, Respondent
Brian F. Castro — Womble Bond Dickson (US) LLP, Respondent
Joseph E. Blackburn, Jr. et ux.
Ernest Lee Conner Jr. — Graham Nuckolls Conner Law Firm PLLC, Petitioner
Ernest Lee Conner Jr. — Graham Nuckolls Conner Law Firm PLLC, Petitioner
Town of Nags Head, et al.