Sheetz v. El Dorado County
Decided April 12, 2024. Amy Coney Barrett delivered the opinion of the Court.
Docket 22-1074 · 601 U.S. 267 (2024) · Cited 20 times
Holding
The Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land-use permit conditions.
The Court’s statement of the holding, from the opinion’s syllabus. The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. Read the official opinion for authority.
Precedents cited
Supreme Court decisions this opinion relies on, ordered by how often it cites each. Cases in our collection link through; others are named.
- Dolan v. City of Tigard · 512 U.S. 374 (1994)
- Nollan v. California Coastal Commission · 483 U.S. 825 (1987)
- Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist. · 570 U.S. 595 (2013)
- Perry v. Sindermann · 408 U.S. 593 (1972)
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City · 438 U.S. 104 (1978)
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. · 272 U.S. 365 (1926)
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. · 458 U.S. 419 (1982)
- Armstrong v. United States · 364 U.S. 40 (1960)
- Sherbert v. Verner · 374 U.S. 398 (1963)
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council · 505 U.S. 1003 (1992)
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon · 260 U.S. 393 (1922)
- Palazzolo v. Rhode Island · 533 U.S. 606 (2001)
- Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County · 415 U.S. 250 (1974)
- Agency for Int'l Development v. Alliance for Open Society Int'l, Inc. · 570 U.S. 205 (2013)
- Terral v. Burke Construction Co. · 257 U.S. 529 (1922)
Official text
Read the official opinion (PDF, supremecourt.gov)
Explore from here
Amy Coney Barrett’s profile · All Supreme Court opinions · The Supreme Court
Source: Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinions (2024). Citation count from the Free Law Project’s CourtListener bulk data. Data last verified 2026-08-15. Informational only; verify against the primary source before relying. Not a consumer report (FCRA).