The city will argue that it was acting in the public’s interest for safety. A taking is a steep hill to climb especially considering that the property owners were not permanently denied use of their property.
“The city will argue that it was acting in the public’s interest for safety. A taking is a steep hill to climb especially considering that the property owners were not permanently denied use of their property.”
If they were interested in safety they would have stopped it from happening. They would have cleaned it out with authority after it happened.
At the least, they are liable for that period of time. And now those businesses and their properties are likely permanently impaired.
Could be like false imprisonment is not quite kidnapping but actionable. Sort of a violation of civil rights tact. I bope the plaintiffs win and bankrupt the city government.