This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Kelo v. New London: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|court=Supreme Court of the United States | |court=Supreme Court of the United States | ||
|date=June 2005 | |date=June 2005 | ||
| | |subject=Property | ||
|facts=In 2000s, New London, Connecticut was a factory town that lost its industrial base. In deal with the economic decline, the City of New London adopted a plan of economic development. | |facts=In 2000s, New London, Connecticut was a factory town that lost its industrial base. In deal with the economic decline, the City of New London adopted a plan of economic development. | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6wrBbgsj34 | |link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6wrBbgsj34 | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |source_type=Video summary | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee, version 1 | |||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | }}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65IhHgoWZV0 | |link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65IhHgoWZV0 |
Latest revision as of 03:41, July 14, 2023
Kelo v. New London | |
Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | June 2005 |
Facts
In 2000s, New London, Connecticut was a factory town that lost its industrial base. In deal with the economic decline, the City of New London adopted a plan of economic development.
The City of New London decide to seize and demolish private property to build waterfront properties and create jobs. The City's goal was to build up hotels, theaters, restaurants, new residences, shopping malls, office buildings, and research facilities.
New London Development Corporation was a private company to which the City delegated the power to take private property in accordance with the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution. The plan was for the Corporation to sell the property; an auction was planned to be set up.
Kelo and 9 other landowners received a notice that their property would be seized by eminent domain if they didn't agree to the sale to the development company.