United States Leading Case exactionspermit conditionsunconstitutional conditions

Dolan v. City of Tigard

512 U.S. 374 (1994); 114 S. Ct. 2309; 129 L. Ed. 2d 304

JurisdictionUnited States

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

Year1994

StatusBinding authority

Key Principle

Beyond an essential nexus, a development exaction must bear 'rough proportionality' to the projected impact of the proposed development, and the government bears the burden of making that individualized showing.

Area of Law

Land & Property

Related Cases

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council 505 U.S. 1003 (1992); 112 S. Ct. 2886; 120 L. Ed. 2d 798

Nollan v. California Coastal Commission 483 U.S. 825 (1987); 107 S. Ct. 3141; 97 L. Ed. 2d 677

Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. 458 U.S. 419 (1982); 102 S. Ct. 3164; 73 L. Ed. 2d 868

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Dolan v. City of Tigard and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Dolan v. City of Tigard