This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|date=June 30, 1982 | |date=June 30, 1982 | ||
|subject=Property | |subject=Property | ||
|appealed_from=NY Court of Appeals (highest NY court) | |||
|case_treatment=No | |case_treatment=No | ||
|facts=Loretto owned a 5-story apartment building in New York City in the | |facts=Loretto owned a 5-story apartment building in New York City in the late 1970s. | ||
The state of New York passed a law requiring landlords to permit the installation of cables by cable companies. | |||
The owner of each building--under the new law--would receive only a nominal $1 for allowing the wires to pass through their property. | |||
|procedural_history=Loretto filed a lawsuit claiming that the state had engaged in a taking of her property without just compensation. Loretto loses at the trial court in New York. | |||
|comments=*[[Constitutional_Law_Maggs/4th_ed._Outline_II#LORETTO_V._TELEPROMPTER_MANHATTAN_CATV_CORP..2C_Supreme_Court_of_theUnited_States_.281982.29]] | |comments=*[[Constitutional_Law_Maggs/4th_ed._Outline_II#LORETTO_V._TELEPROMPTER_MANHATTAN_CATV_CORP..2C_Supreme_Court_of_theUnited_States_.281982.29]] | ||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
Revision as of 19:51, February 26, 2023
| Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. | |
| Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | June 30, 1982 |
| Appealed from | NY Court of Appeals (highest NY court) |
Facts
Loretto owned a 5-story apartment building in New York City in the late 1970s.
The state of New York passed a law requiring landlords to permit the installation of cables by cable companies.
The owner of each building--under the new law--would receive only a nominal $1 for allowing the wires to pass through their property.Procedural History
Loretto filed a lawsuit claiming that the state had engaged in a taking of her property without just compensation. Loretto loses at the trial court in New York.
