Gisela Aguilar
February 17, 2024
LAW 402B
Class 22 Case Brief
Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
FACTS:
In 1965, New York City implemented the Landmarks Preservation Law. This law established a
commission responsible for approving any changes to the exterior of landmark properties. Penn
Central Transportation Company and UGP were the plaintiffs. They contracted with UGP to
build an apartment building above the train station. According to the contract, UGP agreed to
pay Penn Central 1 Million dollars annually while under construction and 3 million dollars once
the construction was completed. However, the defendant, New York City, rejected two separate
plans proposed by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs claimed that the rejection of their plans was a
form of taking and thus deserved compensation.
ISSUE:
"Is the Landmarks Preservation Law, as applied in this case, considered a compensated taking?"
RULE:
The Taking Clause of the five Fifth Amendment.
ANALYSIS:
There are two types of takings: permanent physical occupation and regulatory takings. The court
ruling created the Penn Central test, which has three criteria for evaluating regulatory takings:
1.
The economic impact of the regulation on the client is considered.
