Evans: U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Florida Beach Property Rights 'Not a Majority Opinion'

Jun 17, 2010, 17:45 ET from Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC

BIRMINGHAM, Ala., June 17 /PRNewswire/ -- On the heels of today's U.S. Supreme Court decision, Jesse P. Evans III, an attorney of the law firm of Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC, who has extensive practice in the area of condemnation law and property rights, released the following statement:

Today the United States Supreme Court decided Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. In this case, a group of landowners claimed that a decision of the Florida Supreme Court, supposedly redefining some of their property rights in beachfront property, was a taking that required government to compensate them under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

While the judgment was unanimous against the landowners, it is important to note that the rationale of the Court behind the judgment was sharply divided.  Justice Scalia wrote the main opinion in which he held that a state court decision, like a legislative or executive act, may be a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment requiring compensation to the landowner. 

However, this opinion is not a majority opinion because only three other Justices, Roberts, Thomas and Alito, agreed.  It is therefore entitled to less precedential value than opinions rendered by five or more members of the Court.  This division underscores the importance of Justice Stevens' successor in the area of property rights.

To schedule an interview with Mr. Evans, please contact K.B. Forbes directly at (202) 320-1212 or via email at kbforbes@hotmail.com

For more information about Haskell Slaughter, visit www.hsy.com.

SOURCE Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC