Nollan v. California Coastal Commission

Media Items

Oral Argument

Expanded View

Download MP3

Advocates

Robert K. Best (Argued the cause for the appellants)

Andrea Sheridan Ordin (Argued the cause for the appellee)

Case Basics

Docket No.:

86-133

Appellee:

California Coastal Commission

Appellant:

Nollan

Decided By:

Rehnquist Court (1986-1987)

Opinion:

483 U.S. 825 (1987)

Argued:

Monday, March 30, 1987

Decided:

Friday, June 26, 1987

Issues:

Due Process, Takings Clause

Categories:

eminent domain, police power, takings clause, property, fourteenth amendment, fifth amendment

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Nollan v. California Coastal Commission , 483 U.S. 825 (1987)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1986/1986_86_133)

Facts of the Case:

The California Coastal Commission required owners of beachfront property wishing to obtain a building permit to maintain a pathway on their property open to the public.

Question:

Did the requirement constitute a property taking in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments?

Conclusion:

Yes. The Court agreed that a legitimate interest may be served by maintaining a "continuous strip of publicly accessible beach along the coast." However, reasoned Justice Scalia, if California wished to use its power of eminent domain to do so, it must provide just compensation to the Nollans and other beachfront property owners for the public use of their land.

Decisions

Decision: 5 votes for Nollan, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Takings Clause

Sort by Ideology