Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-b58lm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-05T06:26:56.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part IV - Property in Common Law and Public Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2025

Eric R. Claeys
Eric R. Claeys
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Natural Property Rights , pp. 219 - 306
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

Ackerman, Bruce A. 1977. Private Property and the Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
American Law Institute. 1939. Restatement (First) of Torts. St. Paul, MN: American Law Institute Publishers.Google Scholar
American Law Institute. 1965–79. Restatement (Second) of Torts. St. Paul, MN: American Law Institute Publishers.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 2002. Nicomachean Ethics, translated by Sachs, Joe. Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing.Google Scholar
Calabresi, Guido. 1961. “Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Torts,” Yale Law Journal 70 (4): 499–553.Google Scholar
Calabresi, Guido. 1970. The Cost of Accidents: A Legal and Economic Analysis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2010. “Jefferson Meets Coase: Land-Use Torts, Law and Economics, and Property Rights,” Notre Dame Law Review 85 (4): 1379–446.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2014. “On the ‘Property’ and ‘Tort’ in Trespass,” in Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Torts, Oberdiek, John ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 122–47.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2017. “Sparks Cases in Contemporary Law and Economic Scholarship,” Research Handbook on Austrian Law and Economics, Todd J. Zywicki and Peter J. Boettke eds. Cheltenham: UK: Elgar Publishing, pp. 233–60.Google Scholar
Coase, R.H. 1960. “The Problem of Social Cost,” Journal of Law and Economics 3 (1): 1–44.Google Scholar
Coleman, Jules L. 2002. Risks and Wrongs, 2d ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, Jules L. 2003. “The Grounds of Welfare,” Yale Law Journal 112 (6): 1511–43.Google Scholar
Coleman, Jules. 2010. “Epilogue to Risks and Wrongs: Second Edition,” https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1679554, last accessed March 30, 2021.Google Scholar
Cooter, Robert and Ulen, Thomas. 2004. Law and Economics, 4th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson/Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Dukeminier, Jesse, Krier, James E., Alexander, Gregory S., Schill, Michael A., and Strahilevitz, Lior Jacob. 2018. Property, 9th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.Google Scholar
Ellickson, Robert C. 1973. “Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls,” University of Chicago Law Review 40 (4): 681–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellickson, Robert C. 1989. “The Case for Coase and Against ‘Coaseanism,’” Yale Law Journal 99 (3): 611–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1979a. “Nuisance Law: Corrective Justice and Its Utilitarian Constraints,” Journal of Legal Studies 8 (1): 49–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1979b. “Possession as the Root of Title,” Georgia Law Review 13 (4): 1221–43.Google Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1987. “Causation—In Context: An Afterword,” Chicago-Kent Law Review 63 (3): 653–80.Google Scholar
Farber, Daniel A. 1997. “Parody Lost/Pragmatism Regained: The Ironic History of the Coase Theorem,” Virginia Law Review 83 (2): 397–428.Google Scholar
Finnis, John. 1980. Natural Law and Natural Rights, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
Finnis, John M. 1990. “Allocating Risks and Suffering: Some Hidden Traps,” Cleveland State Law Review 38 (2): 193–207.Google Scholar
Finnis, John M. 2002. “Natural Law: The Classical Tradition,” in The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, Coleman, Jules, Shapiro, Scott & Himma, Kenneth Einar eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–60.Google Scholar
Fletcher, George P. 1996. Basic Concepts of Legal Thought. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grady, Mark F. 1988. “Common Law Control of Strategic Behavior: Railroad Sparks and the Farmer,” Journal of Legal Studies 17 (1): 15–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H.L.A. 1982. Essays on Bentham: Studies in Jurisprudence and Political Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hershovitz, Scott. 2006. “Two Models of Tort (and Takings),” Virginia Law Review 92 (6): 1147–88.Google Scholar
Keating, Gregory C. 2021. “Corrective Justice: Sovereign or Subordinate?” in The Oxford Handbook of the New Private Law, Gold, Andrew S. et al. eds. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 37–52.Google Scholar
Keeton, W. Page, Dobbs, Dan B., Keeton, Robert E., and Owen, David G.. 1984. Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kelman, Mark. 1987. A Guide to Critical Legal Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lewin, Jeff L. 1990. “Boomer and the American Law of Nuisance: Past, Present, and Future,” Albany Law Review 54 (2): 189–300.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alison. 2019. “Doctrine of Double Effect,” in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta ed., https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/double-effect/ (last accessed March 9, 2021).Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W. & Smith, Henry E.. 2001. “What Happened to Property in Law and Economics?” Yale Law Journal 111 (2): 357–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W. & Smith, Henry E.. 2011. “Making Coasean Property More Coasean,” Journal of Law and Economics 54 (4): S77–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelman, Frank I. 1982. “Ethics, Economics, and the Law of Property,” in NOMOS XXIV: Ethics, Economics, and the Law, Pennock, Ronald & Chapman, John W. eds. New York: New York University Press, pp. 3–40.Google Scholar
Mossoff, Adam and Claeys, Eric R.. 2021. “Patent Injunctions, Economics, and Rights,” Journal of Legal Studies 50 (S): S129–49.Google Scholar
Penner, J.E. 1997. The Idea of Property in Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Plunkett, David & Sundell, Tim. 2013. “Disagreement and the Semantics of Normative and Evaluative Terms,” Philosophers’ Imprint 13 (23): 1–37.Google Scholar
Polinsky, A. Mitchell. 2019. An Introduction to Law and Economics, 5th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 2011. Economic Analysis of Law, 8th ed. New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.Google Scholar
Restatement. See entries under “American Law Institute.”Google Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur. 2016. Private Wrongs. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Fred R. and Pearse, Michelle. 2012. “The Most-Cited Law Review Articles of All Time,” Michigan Law Review 110 (8): 1483–520.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Scott & McClennen, Edward F.. 1998. “Law-and-economics from a Philosophical Perspective,” in The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, Newman, Peter ed. New York: Stockton Press, vol. II, pp. 460–65.Google Scholar
Smith, Henry E. 2004. “Exclusion and Property Rules in the Law of Nuisance,” Virginia Law Review 90 (4): 965–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Henry E. 2009. “Mind the Gap: The Indirect Relation between Ends and Means in American Property Law,” Cornell Law Review 94 (4): 959–89.Google Scholar
Veit, Helen E., Bowling, Kenneth R. and Bickford, Charlene Bangs eds. 1991. Creating the Bill of Rights: The Documentary Record from the First Federal Congress. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Weinrib, Ernest. 2012. The Idea of Private Law, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittman, Donald. 1979. “First Come, First Served: An Economic Analysis of ‘Coming to the Nuisance,’” Journal of Legal Studies 9 (3): 557–68.Google Scholar
Wittman, Donald. 1984. “Liability for Harm or Restitution for Benefit?” Journal of Legal Studies 13 (1): 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, Michael Allan, ed. 2009. Powell on Real Property. New York: Matthew Bender.Google Scholar
Wood, Horace. 1883. A Practical Treatise on the Law of Nuisances in Their Various Forms; Including Remedies Therefor at Law and in Equity, 2nd ed. Albany, NY: John D. Parsons.Google Scholar
Zywicki, Todd J. & Boettke, Peter J. eds. 2017. Research Handbook on Austrian Law and Economics. Cheltenham, U.K.: Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Barnett, Randy E. 2001. “The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause,” University of Chicago Law Review 68 (1): 101–47.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2003. “Takings, Regulations, and Natural Property Rights,” Cornell Law Review 88 (6): 1549–671.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2004a. “Takings and Private Property on the Rehnquist Court,” Northwestern University Law Review 99 (1): 187–230.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2004b. “Euclid Lives? The Uneasy Legacy of Progressivism in Zoning,” Fordham Law Review 73 (2): 731–70.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2006. “Takings: An Appreciative Retrospective,” William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 15 (2): 439–55.Google Scholar
Cooley, Thomas M. 1868. A Treatise on the Constitutional Limitations Which Rest Upon the Legislative Power of the States of the American Union, 8th ed., Carrington, Walter ed. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co., 1927.Google Scholar
Department of Commerce. 1926. “A Standard State Zoning Enabling Act under Which Municipalities May Adopt Zoning Regulations.”Google Scholar
Ellickson, Robert C. 2021. “Measuring Exclusionary Zoning in the Suburbs,” Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research 23 (3): 249–264.Google Scholar
Ely, James W. 2007. Property: The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1985. Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fennell, Lee Anne. 2009. The Unbound Home: Property Values beyond Property Lines. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischel, William A. 2005. “Politics in a Dynamic View of Land-Use Regulations: Of Interest Groups and Homevoters,” Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 31 (4): 397–403.Google Scholar
Ford, Richard Thompson. 1994. “The Boundaries of Race: Political Geography in Legal Analysis,” Harvard Law Review 107 (8): 1841–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furman, Jason. 2015. Chairman, Council of Economic Advisers. Remarks at the Urban Institute: Barriers to Shared Growth: The Case of Land Use Regulation and Economic Rents.Google Scholar
Haar, Charles M. 1996. “The Twilight of Land-Use Controls: A Paradigm Shift,” University of Richmond Law Review 30 (4): 1011.Google Scholar
Haar, Charles M. and Wolf, Michael Allan. 2002. “Euclid Lives: The Survival of Progressive Jurisprudence,” Harvard Law Review 115 (8): 2158–204.Google Scholar
Halper, Louise A. 1995. “Why the Nuisance Knot Can’t Undo the Takings Muddle,” Indiana Law Review 28 (2): 329–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamburger, Philip A. 1993. “Natural Law, Natural Rights, and American Constitutions,” Yale Law Journal 102 (4): 907–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, Alexander, John, Jay & James, Madison. 1787–88. The Federalist: The Gideon Edition, Carey, George W. and McClellan, James eds. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc. 2001.Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich A. (1945) “The Use of Knowledge in Society,” American Economic Review 35 (4): 519–30.Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver Wendell. 1918. “Natural Law,” Harvard Law Review 32 (1): 40–44.Google Scholar
Kahlenberg, Richard D. 2021. “Tearing Down the Walls: How the Biden Administration and Congress Can Reduce Exclusionary Zoning,” The New Century Foundation, April 18, 2021, last accessed https://tcf.org/content/report/tearing-walls-biden-administration-congress-can-reduce-exclusionary-zoning/.Google Scholar
Keeton, W. Page et al. 1984. Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, 5th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1826–30/1971. Commentaries on American Law, 2d ed. New York: Da Capo Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1873. Commentaries on American Law, 12th ed., Wendell Holmes, Oliver ed. Littleton, CO: Fred B. Rothman, 1989 [“Kent and Holmes ed. (1873/1989)”].Google Scholar
Lawson, Gary et al. 2010. The Origins of the Necessary and Proper Clause. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Brian Angelo. 2013. “Average Reciprocity of Advantage,” in Philosophical Foundations of Property Law, Penner, James E. and Smith, Henry E. eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 99–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legarre, Santiago. 2007. “The Historical Background of the Police Power,” University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 9 (3): 745–96.Google Scholar
Lemar, Anika S. 2019. “The Role of States in Liberalizing Land Use Regulations,” North Carolina Law Review 97 (2): 293–353.Google Scholar
McGarity, Thomas O. 1992. “Some Thoughts on ‘Deossifying’ the Rulemaking Process” Duke Law Journal 41 (6): 1385–462.Google Scholar
Merriam Webster Dictionary. 2021. www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/regulate (last visited Mar. 25, 2023).Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W., Smith, Henry E. & Brady, Maureen E.. 2022. Property: Principles and Policies, 4th ed. St. Paul, MN: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Michelman, Frank I. 1967. “Property, Utility, and Fairness: Comments on the Ethical Foundations of ‘Just Compensation’ Law,” Harvard Law Review 80 (6): 1165–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naudé, Wim. 2022. “From the Entrepreneurial to the Ossified Economy,” Cambridge Journal of Economics 46 (1): 105–31.Google Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1982. The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Pohlman, H.L. 1984. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and Utilitarian Jurisprudence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postell, Joseph. 2016. “Regulation during the American Founding: Achieving Liberalism and Republicanism,” American Political Thought 5 (1): 80–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzo, Mario J. 1980. “The Mirage of Efficiency,” Hofstra Law Review 8 (3): 641–58.Google Scholar
Rose, Carol M. 1984. “Mahon Reconstructed: Why the Takings Issue Is Still a Muddle,” Southern California Law Review 57 (4): 561–599.Google Scholar
Sax, Joseph L. 1964. “Takings and the Police Power,” Yale Law Journal 74 (1): 36–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sax, Joseph L. 1971. “Takings, Private Property and Public Rights,” Yale Law Journal 81 (2): 149–86.Google Scholar
Schleicher, David. 2017. “Stuck! The Law and Economics of Residential Stagnation,” The Yale Law Journal 127 (1): 78–154.Google Scholar
Schleicher, David. 2021. “Exclusionary Zoning’s Confused Defenders,” Wisconsin Law Review 2021 (5): 1316–72.Google Scholar
Schragger, Richard C. 2021. “The Perils of Land Use Deregulation,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 170 (125): 125–205.Google Scholar
Seidman, Louis M. and Tushnet, Mark V.. 1996. Remnants of Belief: Contemporary Constitutional Issues. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serkin, Christopher. 2020. “A Case for Zoning,” Notre Dame Law Review 96 (2): 749–98.Google Scholar
Sitaraman, et al. 2021. “Regulation and the Geography of Inequality,” Duke Law Journal 70 (8): 1763–836.Google Scholar
Staley, Samuel R. and Claeys, Eric R.. 2005. “Is the Future of Development Regulation Based in the Past? Toward a Market-Oriented, Innovation Friendly Framework,” Journal of Urban Planning and Development 131 (4): 202–13.Google Scholar
Sterk, Stewart E. 2004. “The Inevitable Failure of Nuisance-Based Theories of the Takings Clause: A Reply to Professor Claeys,” Northwestern University Law Review 99 (1): 231–47.Google Scholar
Stigler, George J. 1971. “The Theory of Economic Regulation,” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 2 (1): 3–21.Google Scholar
Strahilevitz, Lior Jacob. 2021. “Hyde Park’s Two Turns in the Takings Clause Spotlight,” Journal of Legal Studies 50 (S2): S71–S89.Google Scholar
Tiedeman, Christopher G. 1886. A Treatise on the Limitations of Police Power in the United States, 2nd ed. New York: Da Capo Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Wettergreen, John Adams. 1988. “Capitalism, Socialism, and Constitutionalism,” in To Secure the Blessings of Liberty, Thurow, Sarah Baumgartner ed. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, pp. 244–68.Google Scholar
Willoughby, Westel Woodbury. 1922. The Constitutional Law of the United States, 2nd ed. New York: Baker, Voorhis & Co.Google Scholar
Wolf, Michael Allan. 2002. “Earning Deference: Reflections on the Merger of Environmental and Land-Use Law,” Pace Environmental Law Review. 32 (10): 11190–99.Google Scholar

References

Ackerman, Bruce A. 1978. Private Property and the Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Benedict, Jeff. 2009. Little Pink House: A True Story of Defiance and Courage. New York: Grand Central Publishing, Hachette Book Group.Google Scholar
Berger, Lawrence. 1978. “The Public Use Requirement in Eminent Domain,” Oregon Law Review 57 (2): 203–46.Google Scholar
Blackstone, William. 1765–69. Commentaries on the Laws of England. Chicago, IL and London: The University of Chicago Press. 1979.Google Scholar
Calabresi, Guido & Douglas Melamed, A.. 1972. “Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral,” Harvard Law Review 85 (6) 1089–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2004. “Public-Use Limitations and Natural Property Rights,” Michigan State Law Review (4): 877–928.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1935/1991. “Liberalism and Social Action,” in John Dewey: The Later Works, Ann Boydston, Jo ed. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 1–65.Google Scholar
Ellickson, Robert C. 2009. “Federalism and Kelo: Two Questions for Richard Epstein,” Tulsa Law Review 44 (4): 751-63.Google Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1985. Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1997. “A Clear View of The Cathedral: The Dominance of Property Rules,” Yale Law Journal 106 (7): 2091–2120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 1998. Principles for a Free Society: Reconciling Individual Liberty with the Common Good. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Epstein, Richard A. 2004. “The Constitutional Protection of Trade Secrets under the Takings Clause,” University of Chicago Law Journal 71 (1): 57–73.Google Scholar
Finnis, John. 2002. “Natural Law: The Classical Tradition,” in The Oxford Handbook of Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law, Coleman, Jules L., Shapiro, Scott J. and Himma, Kenneth Einar eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–60.Google Scholar
Goodnow, Frank J. 1911. Social Reform and the Constitution. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
Grant, J.A.C. 1931. “The Higher Law Background of the Law of Eminent Domain,” Wisconsin Law Review 6 (2): 67–85.Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. 1625/1962. De Jure Belli ac Pacis Libri Tres, Kelsey, Francis W. trans. Indianapolis: Bobbs- Merrill Co.Google Scholar
Heller, Michael. 2008. The Gridlock Economy: How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Jane. 1961/1992. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Justinian. 533/1876. The Institutes of Justinian; with English Introduction, Translation, and Notes, Sandars, Thomas Collett trans. Chicago, IL: Callaghan & Co.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1827/1971. Commentaries on American Law. New York: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Brian A. 2015. “Emergency Takings,” Michigan Law Review 114 (3): 391–453.Google Scholar
Lenhoff, Arthur. 1942. “Development of the Concept of Eminent Domain,” Columbia Law Review 42 (4): 596–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, John. 1909. A Treatise on the Law of Eminent Domain in the United States, 3rd ed. Chicago, IL: Callaghan & Company.Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W. 1986. “The Economics of Public Use,” Cornell Law Review 72 (1): 61–116.Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W. 2006. “Six Myths about Kelo,” Probate and Property, January/February 2006, 19–23.Google Scholar
Miceli, Thomas J. 2011. The Economic Theory of Eminent Domain: Private Property, Public Use. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossoff, Adam. Forthcoming. “The False Promise of Breaking Patents to Lower Drug Prices,” St. John’s Law Review 97 (2).Google Scholar
Nichols, Philip Jr. 1940. “The Meaning of Public Use in the Law of Eminent Domain,” Boston University Law Review 20 (4): 615–41.Google Scholar
Note. 1949. “The Public Use Limitation on Eminent Domain: An Advance Requiem,” Yale Law Journal 58 (4): 599–614.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 2011. Economic Analysis of Law, 8th edition. New York: Aspen Publishers.Google Scholar
Pritchett, Wendell E. 2003. “The ‘Public Menace’ of Blight: Urban Renewal and the Private Uses of Eminent Domain,” Yale Law & Policy Review 21 (1): 1–52.Google Scholar
Sackman, Julius L. et al. 2009. Nichols on Eminent Domain, 3rd ed. Newark: Matthew Bender.Google Scholar
Sales, Nathan Alexander. 1999. Note. “Classical Republicanism and the Fifth Amendment’s ‘Public Use’ Requirement,” Duke Law Journal 49 (1): 339–82.Google Scholar
Sax, Joseph L. 2005. “Kelo: A Case Rightly Decided,” University of Hawai’i Law Review 28 (2): 365–71.Google Scholar
Somin, Ilya. 2004. “Overcoming Poletown: County of Wayne v. Hathcock, Economic Development Takings, and the Future of Public Use,” Michigan State Law Review 2004 (4): 1005–39.Google Scholar
Somin, Ilya. 2015. The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. City of New London and the Limits of Eminent Domain. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Speta, James B. 2002. “A Common Carrier Approach to Internet Connection,” Federal Communications Law Journal 54 (2): 225–79.Google Scholar
Underkuffler, Laura S. 2003. The Idea of Property: Its Meaning and Its Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, Jeanie. 1990. Poletown: A Community Betrayed. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

References

Casado-Pérez, Vanessa. 2023. “Too Simple Rules for a Complex World? Prior Appropriation Rights as Natural Rights,” Texas A&M Journal of Property Law 9 (4): 483–91.Google Scholar
Claeys, Eric R. 2023. “Natural Property Rights: An Introduction,” Texas A&M Journal of Property Law 9 (4): 415–81.Google Scholar
Eagle, Steven J. 2014. “The Four-Factor Penn Central Regulatory Takings Test,” Pennsylvania State Law Review 118 (3): 601–46.Google Scholar
Echeverria, John D. 2000. “Is the Penn Central Three-Factor Test Ready for History’s Dustbin?” Land Use Law & Zoning Digest 52 (1): 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glackin, Shane Nicholas. 2014. “Back to Bundles: Deflating Property Rights, Again,” Legal Theory 20 (1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, John. 1698/1988. Two Treatises of Government, Laslett, Peter ed. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Serkin, Christopher. 2023. “The Future of Property Law: Reflections on Eric Claeys’s Natural Property Rights,” Texas A&M Journal of Property Law 9 (4): 725–32.Google Scholar
Wyman, Katrina M. 2018. “The New Essentialism in Property,” Journal of Legal Analysis 9 (2): 183–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×