Loading…
Slip Slidin' Away: Easements, Avulsion, Access, and the Ever Changing Law of Beach Front Property
In Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,6 the United States Supreme Court held that the state's ownership of land created when new sand was added to the beach was not an unconstitutional taking.7 Under Florida law, all beachfront property seaward of the...
Saved in:
Published in: | The Urban lawyer 2011-06, Vol.43 (3), p.813-822 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | In Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,6 the United States Supreme Court held that the state's ownership of land created when new sand was added to the beach was not an unconstitutional taking.7 Under Florida law, all beachfront property seaward of the median high water mark belongs to the state, while the owners of beachfront property own the land between that line and their homes. The Florida Supreme Court rejected that argument.8 The United States Supreme Court unanimously held that under the facts of the case a taking had not occurred.9 The Court found that the landowners had been unable to prove that the deprived littoral rights were superior to the state's right to restore the beaches.10 Because no taking was involved, the individual was not due compensation.11 However, the Supreme Court justices disagreed on whether the court should recognize a judicial takings doctrine.12 The Court acknowledged that property had been deprived of its character (and value) as oceanfront property by the State's artificial creation of an avulsion. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0042-0905 1942-6593 |