Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Higginson finds the district court improperly found the city violated the takings clause when it refused to compensate the homeowner for damage to her property caused by police officers use of armored vehicles, explosives and toxic-gas grenades to resolve a hostage situation. History and precedent affirm that the takings clause does not require compensation for damaged property when the destruction was objectively necessary to prevent imminent harm to persons in an active emergency. Reversed.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.