Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 11 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from State v. Schmidt.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Schmidt Anchor | green | “relating to remote, speculative, and conjectural uses, as well as injuries, which are not reflected in the present market value of the property.” | 5 |
| 2 | Town of Flower Mound v. Stafford Estates Ltd. Partnership | green | “a regulatory taking may occur when governmental land-use regulation deprives a land owner of all economically viable use of his land or when the land-use regulation does not substantially advance a legitimate state interest.” | 3 |
| 3 | City of Pearland v. Alexander | green | “may recover damages which are reasonably foreseeable, and he or she may show the reasonably probable uses of the tract taken that are calculated to depress the value of the remainder tract and thus enhance the recovery of damages.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.