PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORT CO. v. NEW YORK

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
77-444
Appellee 
New York
Appellant 
Penn Central Transport Co.
Advocates
(Argued the cause for the appellees)
(Argued the cause for the appellants)
(Argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging affirmance)
Tags
Term:
Facts of the Case 

The New York City Landmarks Preservation Law of 1965 empowered the city to designate certain structures and neighborhoods as "landmarks" or "landmark sites." Penn Central, which owned the Grand Central Terminal (opened in 1913), was not allowed to construct a multistory office building above it.

Question 

Did the restriction against Penn Central constitute a "taking" in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments?

Conclusion 
Decision: 6 votes for New York, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Takings Clause

No. The Court held that the restrictions imposed did not prevent Penn Central from ever constructing above the terminal in the future. New York's objection was to the nature of the proposed construction and not to construction in general implemented to "enhance" the Terminal. Preventing the construction of a 50-plus story addition above the station was a reasonable restriction substantially related to the general welfare of the city.

Cite this Page
PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORT CO. v. NEW YORK. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 19 June 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_77_444>.
PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORT CO. v. NEW YORK, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_77_444 (last visited June 19, 2014).
"PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORT CO. v. NEW YORK," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed June 19, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_77_444.