concluding "[pJroposed, but unfulfilled plans to conderan land do not constitute a taking because such plans do not amount to an exercise of dominion and control over the property by the condemning authority and do not prohibit the landowner from exercising dominion and control over his property"
How later courts described this case
- concluding "[pJroposed, but unfulfilled plans to conderan land do not constitute a taking because such plans do not amount to an exercise of dominion and control over the property by the condemning authority and do not prohibit the landowner from exercising dominion and control over his property"
- noting that issue of damages in a condemnation action is a jury question, while determination of the character of the use served is a matter for the court
- "Proposed, but unfulfilled plans to condemn land do not constitute a taking because such plans do not amount to an exercise of dominion and control over the property by the condemning authority and do not prohibit the landowner from exercising dominion and control over his property."
- constitution measures taMng of property not by what state says or intends, but by what it does
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
HANSEN, P.J.,
concurs in result.
¶ 1 I concur with the result under the specific circumstances of this ease. However in my view, there may be circumstances where a taking does occur absent physical *615 invasion or enactment of regulations that substantially impair the property’s usefulness.