'This thought-provoking and skillfully executed book offers fresh theoretical and empirical insights into questions of eminent domain compensation. Chang's analysis of this interesting and important area is illuminating and sure to spark further dialogue.' – Lee Anne Fennell, University of Chicago Law School, US 'Chang's book represents the state of the art in the legal, economic, and political analysis of compensation for physical takings. Writing with analytical skill and clarity, Chang makes a strong case for fair market value compensation with financial bonuses to properly incentivize assessors.' – Daniel L. Rubinfeld, University of California, Berkeley, US This innovative volume offers a thorough breakdown of the issues surrounding takings compensation – payments made as reimbursement for government takeover of private property. Using examples from New York City and Taiwan, Yun-chien Chang discusses the advantages and disadvantages of different methods of compensation and offers insightful suggestions for future implementation. In an effort to fill the gaps in the current literature, the author identifies the five previously recognized types of compensation – zero, current value, fair market value, economic value and project value compensation – and uses a combination of previous research and new data to determine which is the most economically efficient. In doing so, he sets out a concrete methodology for the evaluation of takings compensation strategies that should prove vital to future policy decisions. Students and professors of law, economics and public policy will find much of interest in the author's careful analysis, as will policymakers and other government officials working on similar land use issues.
See also Country Community Timberlake Village v. HMW Special Utility District of Harris, 438 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) (holding that a neighboring ...
After Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's pierced nipple on national television for 9/16ths of a second, the FCC received over 540,000 complaints.
Volume III: The Chesapeake and New England, 1660-1750 William E. Nelson ... Decision of Law, Surry County Ct. 1673/74, in Eliza Timberlake Davis ed., ...
E. Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941), 66 Edwards v. Housing Authority of City of ... Timberlake, 148 Ind. 38,46 N.E.339 (1897), 69,70 Graves v.
Fitzgerald, 4.08[B][2], 5.05[D] Fitzgerald v. ... Mastrapa-Font, 7.03[A][3] Fontaine, In re, 5.05[D] Fontenette v. ... Frost, 5.05[A] Formato v.
The sole remedy is avoidance, however; damages cannot be claimed under s. ... 17, it places a great deal of power in the hands of insurance companies to ...
Normally, a mate«s receipt would later be given up for a bill of lading, ... they necessarily prejudice the rights of those who deal in the goods ...
27 257 U.S. 184, 42 S. Ct. 72, 66 L. Ed. 189 (1921). ... 38 Argensinger, “Right to Strike”: Labor Organization and the New Deal in Baltimore, 78 MD . HIST .
704 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, s. 80. 705 Leith v. Gould [1986] 1 NZLR 760. It is not clear how a New Zealand court would deal with a case such ...
... to meet the reasonable expectations of claimants about how the corporation should deal with them, by, inter alia, ... 7 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, s.