Lake Country Estates, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
United States Supreme Court
440 U.S. 391 (1979)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) was formed by the states of California and Nevada, as approved by Congress under the Compact Clause. TRPA members were appointed by county and city governments, governors, and by virtue of their jobs. TRPA was authorized to adopt and enforce a regional plan for the Lake Tahoe Basin, which straddles California and Nevada. Lake Tahoe property owners (property owners) (plaintiffs), including Lake Country Estates, filed suit in the district court alleging that defendants consisting of TRPA, the individual members of its governing body, and its executive officer (defendants), in adopting a land-use plan, had destroyed their properties’ economic value. The property owners alleged their property was taken without due process of law. The property owners sought monetary and equitable relief under two theories. First, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments created an implied cause of action. Second, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 created a cause of action because TRPA and its members had acted under color of law, granting the district court jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1343, which allows for redress of deprivation of rights under color of state law. The district court dismissed the complaint against all defendants, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the complaint against the individual defendants. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Marshall, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.