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

To: tdadams
Similiar thing happened a few years back in Hurst, Texas. An entire neighborhood was seized under Immenent Domain to allow for the expansion of a shopping mall. Some of the homeowners decided to fight it out in the courts. I beleive the court battle still hasn't been settled, but meanwhile, their homes were bulldozed and the expansion on the mall has been completed.

I think it's extremely disturbing that a court would even spend more than 30 seconds on this before deciding in favor of the homeowner.

"You want to seize these homes and sell the property for commercial development?"
"That's correct, your Honor."
"You do realize that would violate the homeowners 4th amendment rights to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures?"
"You Honor, the extra tax revenue would benefit the city greatly."
"I've made my decision. I'm ruling in favor of the homeowner. I also find in favor of the homeowner on their countersuit, and order the city to pay 10 times the estimated property value as a penalty for violating the homeowner's constitutional rights."
Bang! Bang! (the gavel)

102 posted on 09/12/2003 10:23:36 AM PDT by JavaTheHutt ( Gun Control - The difference between Lexington Green and Tiennimen Square.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: JavaTheHutt
I beleive the court battle still hasn't been settled, but meanwhile, their homes were bulldozed and the expansion on the mall has been completed.

If the homes were bulldozed, it was settled. It was settled teh second they accepted the offer from the government.

106 posted on 09/12/2003 10:28:23 AM PDT by HurkinMcGurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

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