Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 17: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:
|recent=
|recent=


* ''Tex. Dep't of Transp. v. Self'', ___ S.W.3d ___, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11329341778052650525#p--- ___] (Tex. 2024) (citations & footnotes omitted) ("'The protection of one's right to own property is said to be one of the most important purposes of government. . . . Our Takings Clause protects against more types of government action than its federal counterpart, as it contains the additional verbs 'damaged,' 'destroyed,' and 'applied'—each of which creates a claim with its own distinct scope. 'When the government takes private property without first paying for it, the owner may recover damages for inverse condemnation.'")
* ''Tex. Dep't of Transp. v. Self'', ___ S.W.3d ___, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11329341778052650525#p--- ___] (Tex. 2024) (citations & footnotes omitted) ("The elements of an inverse condemnation or 'takings' claim are that (1) an entity with eminent domain power intentionally performed certain acts (2) that resulted in taking, damaging, or destroying the property for, or applying it to, (3) public use. Although the Constitution does not expressly require an intentional act, we have explained that such a requirement helps ensure that the taking is for 'public use.' . . . We explore these two ''Jennings'' standards for proving intent in more detail below.")


* ''Rodriguez v. City of Robinson'', ___ S.W.3d ___, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11365408367965305922#p--- ___] (Tex. 2023) (" ... ")
* ''Rodriguez v. City of Robinson'', ___ S.W.3d ___, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11365408367965305922#p--- ___] (Tex. 2023) (" ... ")
Retrieved from "https://texaslegalguide.com/Texas_Constitution:Article_I,_Section_17"