Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear Eminent Domain Extortion Case
Institute for Justice ^ | January 16, 2007 | Institute for Justice

Posted on 01/18/2007 7:03:29 PM PST by STE=Q

Arlington, Va—“Your money or your property” may soon become the mantra of politically connected developers nationwide as the result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s announcement today that it will not consider the appeal of an eminent domain case involving attempted private extortion.

The case the Court declined to review arose out of the Village of Port Chester, N.Y., one of the nation’s worst eminent domain abusers. The Village’s chosen developer approached property owner Bart Didden and his business partner with an offer they couldn’t refuse. Because Didden planned to build a CVS on his property—land the developer coveted for a Walgreens—the developer demanded that Didden either pay him $800,000 to make him “go away” or give him an unearned 50 percent stake in the CVS development. If Didden refused, the developer would have the Village of Port Chester condemn the land for his private use. Didden rejected the bold-faced extortion. The very next day, the Village of Port Chester condemned Didden’s property through eminent domain so it could hand it over to the developer who made the threat.

(Excerpt) Read more at ij.org ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: domain; eminent; eminentdomain; kelo; portchester; propertyrights; redevelopmentzone; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last
"If Didden refused, the developer would have the Village of Port Chester condemn the land for his private use."

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" (Edmund Burke)

1 posted on 01/18/2007 7:03:32 PM PST by STE=Q
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

"The Village’s chosen developer approached property owner ...partner with an offer they couldn’t refuse." Port Chester? The quotes sum it all up.


2 posted on 01/18/2007 7:12:06 PM PST by Sam Ketcham (Amnesty means vote dilution, & increased taxes to bring us down to the world poverty level.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Ketcham

Hey Ketcham! Where's Mitchum?


3 posted on 01/18/2007 7:15:00 PM PST by SierraWasp (There is no one else in the hollow "center" except CA's celebrity collectivist compellinator!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp

Bush's choices for the SC are showing their true colors!


4 posted on 01/18/2007 7:19:10 PM PST by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

DUmmies still are confused at why all the liberal commie judges were for this.


5 posted on 01/18/2007 7:19:19 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

The black-robed dictators opened the can of worms, and now they're afraid to put the lid back on. Score - government 10, citizen 0.


6 posted on 01/18/2007 7:20:20 PM PST by meyer (Bring back the Contract with America and you'll bring back the Republican majority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

You think that this is bad I have family in OK that cant control mineral rights that were bought and paid for over a century ago. Yes they will have to compensate for any gas or oil then recieve but you sure as hell will not make as much money they will off of the profits.


7 posted on 01/18/2007 7:21:47 PM PST by lndrvr1972
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

BTTT!


8 posted on 01/18/2007 7:26:07 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PGalt

Just damn,


9 posted on 01/18/2007 7:27:25 PM PST by mware (By all that you hold dear.. on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

They contribute to the party that not so secretly embraces the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto and are surprised when one of the planks is implemented. Dummies indeed.


10 posted on 01/18/2007 7:28:26 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dalereed
Bush's choices for the SC are showing their true colors!
LOL!
Did you really believe they were Conservatives?
.
11 posted on 01/18/2007 7:36:03 PM PST by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

I would like to know which of the justice's were selected to decide if this case would be heard or not. Can I assume that our new Cheif justice was involved?


12 posted on 01/18/2007 7:44:24 PM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

This is a press release.


13 posted on 01/18/2007 7:47:22 PM PST by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

Hey Village, don't let the rock salt hit you in the ass when you leave.

Seriously, my kids, bf, and I have a streak of juvenile delinquency. Potato up the exhaust pipe, etc. This is a disgusting turn of events when the Supreme Court won't hear this case!


14 posted on 01/18/2007 7:48:05 PM PST by TheSpottedOwl (If you don't understand the word "Illegal", then the public school system has failed you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalereed
Here's a little more info from another source on why it was turned down:

"Didden and Bologna appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which also let the condemnation stand, saying the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo v. City of New London didn't allow Didden and Bologna to challenge a taking within a redevelopment district."

"The court said Didden and Bologna could only challenge the taking of their property by challenging the entire redevelopment plan, which had been expanded in 1999 to include their property, and that a statute of limitations prevented such a challenge to the plan."

http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=7c5911ba-a5c9-435e-a599-4299320d4aef

15 posted on 01/18/2007 7:49:25 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

Comes as no surprise. Probably too far down the slippery slope to climb back without a serious upheaval. Which is not going to happen. Government is adept at confiscating rights in increments. And the average person is incapable of extrapolating the future results.

What I don't get is why liberals seem to think that THEIR property rights will somehow be exempt from this sort of thing. They get all hot and bothered when boobie bars are not allowed to give lap dances (restricting free speech, right?), but snooze away when government confiscates private property (it's for the good of the community). Their priorities are in the Twilight Zone.


16 posted on 01/18/2007 7:57:15 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s......you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that the USSC does nothing or in some cases, does something.


17 posted on 01/18/2007 8:05:55 PM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: STE=Q

With all these egregious eminent domain abuse cases, I keep wondering when a Constitutionally-minded victim will put out a call for the militia to help defend their property. And then I wonder if the militia would actually respond. It will be a beautiful day when a developer's bulldozers arrive at a seized property and are greeted by a few hundred rifle-toting citizens.


18 posted on 01/18/2007 8:18:13 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meyer
"The black-robed dictators opened the can of worms, and now they're afraid to put the lid back on."

I don't think they want to put the lid back on. Lotsa land needed to build lotsa highways for the NAU.

19 posted on 01/18/2007 9:41:27 PM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

I hope someone goes postal at a city council meeting. That's what it's going to take to put a stop to this.


20 posted on 01/18/2007 9:50:12 PM PST by BlazingArizona (co)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson