noting that trial court’s findings that land could be sold to abutters supported its conclusion that the property continued to have economic value
How later courts described this case
- noting that trial court’s findings that land could be sold to abutters supported its conclusion that the property continued to have economic value
- "A person who purchases land with notice of statutory impediments to the right to develop that land can justify few, if any, legitimate investment-backed expectations of development rights which rise to the level of constitutionally protected property rights"
- owner may, without compensation, be barred from filling wetlands because landfilling would deprive adjacent coastal habitats and marine fisheries of ecological support
- purchaser can justify few if any legitimate investment-backed expectations which rise to the level of a constitutionally protected property right
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
King, C.J.,
with whom Douglas, J., joins, concurring specially: While I agree with the majority opinion, I disagree with the conjectural reasoning of both the master and the majority opinion that the land could be sold to abutters or could be used for a tent. Such restricted use is of little solace to an owner who purchased the land on which to construct a house. The theoretical incentive for an abutter to purchase the land or for a person to utilize the land for a tent drastically minimizes, if it does not destroy, the value of the land. The minimal value of the land must be reflected in the assessed value of the land for real estate tax assessments.