Andrew S. Han


A little more than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New London upheld the use of eminent domain for economic development, the Ohio Supreme Court became the first state supreme court to address a factual situation raising the same issues. In City of Norwood v. Horney, the Ohio court repudiated the Kelo rationale and rejected Norwood's proposed takings. Property rights advocates quickly hailed Norwood as a model for other state courts to follow in defending individual land owners from eminent domain abuse. This Note argues that Norwood's holding is incoherent and does nothing to resolve the language-based quagmire that inflames the eminent domain debate. This Note instead contends that the Connecticut Supreme Court's more nuanced Kelo v. City of New London opinion is a superior state court model, which better captures the necessary balance between individual property rights and urban revitalization plans involving eminent domain.

Included in

Law Commons