|
Santini
v. Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service
- In 1991, Santini’s fully permitted, ongoing residential
development was designated as one of three potential sites in
Connecticut for a hazardous waste facility. Not surprisingly, during
the time it was so designated, Santini was not able to sell a single
home or lot in his development. Indeed, because he was unable to sell
any property, he was unable to continue the project. After the
designation was rescinded, Santini sought just compensation for a
temporary regulatory taking. The Superior Court ruled that there had
been no taking because the designation was "mere planning"
by the government. The Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed. Santini
petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review that decision. NELF filed
an amicus brief in its own name, urging the Court to take the case and
reject the exclusion of "mere planning" from Fifth Amendment
scrutiny. The Court denied the petition. Here, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the 2nd Circuit recognized NAHB's
"friend-of-the-court" argument that Mr. Santini had the
right to have his federal constitutional claim heard in federal court
after a state court denied him compensation for the temporary loss of
use of his land. While the second court also denied the landowner any
compensation, this was the first time since 1992 that a federal court
of appeals has decided a takings case on its merits following state
court litigation. More importantly, the court specifically noted in
its decision that property owners may formally reserve the right to
bring their claim to federal court when forced to go to a state court
first. This establishes an important precedent, hereafter to be known
as "the Santini reservation."
|