Santini v. Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service - In 1991, Santiniís 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 After the designation was rescinded, Santini sought just compensation for a temporary regulatory taking.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."