Document: 503 U.S. 519 112 S.Ct. 1522 118 L.Ed.2d 153 John K. YEE, et al., Petitionersv.CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA. No. 90-1947. Argued Jan. 22, 1992. Decided April 1, Syllabus The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause generally requires just compensation where the government authorizes a physical occupation of property. But Government merely regulates property's use, is required only if considerations such as regulation's purpose or extent to which it deprives owner economic use suggests that regulation has unfairly singled out property bear burden should be borne by public whole. Petitioners, mobile home park owners in respondent Escondido, California, rent pads land owners. When homes are sold, new continue pads. Under California Mobilehome Residency Law, bases upon may terminate owner's tenancy limited to, inter alia, nonpayment and desire change his land. not require removal when sold neither charge transfer fee for sale nor disapprove purchaser who able pay rent. state law does limit charge, but Escondido control ordinance setting rents back their 1986 levels prohibiting increases without City Council's approval. Superior Court dismissed lawsuits filed petitioners others challenging ordinance, rejecting argument effected taking depriving all occupancy granting tenants, tenants' successors, right physically permanently occupy Appeal affirmed. Held: 1. authorize an unwanted petitioners' thus amount per se taking. Petitioners' argument—that because, coupled with law's restrictions, home's value giving homeowner pad indefinitely at sub-market rent—is unpersuasive. effects landowner submit Here, have voluntarily rented do so either State. On face, laws issue regulate regulating relationship between landlord tenant. Any wealth from incumbent form itself convert into invasion. Additional contentions made petitioners—that benefits current future owners, must purchase premiums resulting homes' increased value, ability choose incoming tenants—might some bearing on whether causes regulatory taking, nothing Moreover, finding Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 419, 439, n. 17, 102 3164, 3178, 73 868—that claim cannot defeated can avoid statute's restrictions ceasing property, because conditioned forfeiting occupation—has no relevance here, there been Since attempt how used, this case also presents occasion consider statute, applied, prevents them making change. Pp. 526-532. 2. constitutes denial substantive due process properly before was raised below addressed courts. question Court's customary refusal claims jurisdictional prudential rule need resolved even were prudential, would adhered case. 532-533. 3. Also improperly ripe review; fact mean could Court, since once claim, they formulated, any liked support claim. Nonetheless, will considered under Rule 14.1(a), questions set forth, fairly included, petition certiorari considered. 14.1(a) disregarded reasons urgency economy suggest address unpresented consideration. provides notice grounds sought, relieving him expense unnecessary litigation merits opposing questions. It assists selecting cases granted. By forcing parties focus views particularly important, enables its resources efficiently. presented lower court erred related included in, question. Thus, overcome very heavy presumption against consideration done. While courts reached conflicting results Prudence dictates awaiting fully litigated below, benefit developed arguments opinions squarely addressing left first instance. 533-538. 224 Cal.App.3d 1349, 274 Cal.Rptr. 551 (1990), O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, STEVENS, SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, SOUTER, concurring judgment. Robert J. Jagiello, Running Springs, Cal., petitioners. Carter G. Phillips, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice O'CONNOR Court. 1 Amendment provides: "[N]or shall private taken compensation." Most our interpreting fall within two distinct classes. Where (or actually takes title), compensation. See, e.g., 426, 3171, 868 (1982). Penn Central Transp. Co. New York City, 438 104, 123-125, 98 2646, 2659, 57 631 (1978). category apply clear rule; second necessarily entails complex factual assessments purposes actions. 2 Petitioners own parks California. They contend local viewed backdrop California's amounts entitling discussed above. 3 * term "mobile home" somewhat misleading. Mobile largely immobile practical matter, cost moving one often significant fraction itself. placed parks; place, about every hundred ever moved. Hirsch & Hirsch, Legal-Economic Analysis Rent Controls Home Context: Placement Values Vacancy Decontrol, 35 UCLA L.Rev. 399, 405 (1988). A typically plot land, called "pad," park. roads park, common facilities washing machines swimming pool, utilities. invests site-specific improvements driveway, steps, walkways, porches, landscaping. wishes move, usually continues located. 4 In 1978, enacted Cal.Civ.Code Ann. § 798 seq. (West 1982 Supp.1991). Legislature found "that, high mobilehomes, potential damage therefrom, requirements relating installation landscaping lot preparation, necessary mobilehomes occupied mobilehome provided unique protection actual constructive eviction afforded provisions chapter." 798.55(a). 5 Law limits tenancy. These include rent, violation rules, 798.56. rental agreement effect, however, sold. 798.73. sale, 798.72, purchaser, 798.74. contains number other detailed provisions, none charge. 6 wake various communities adopted ordinances. See supra, 408-411. voters did same 1988 approving Proposition K, challenged here. sets levels, prohibits approval Council. Park Council time. approve determines "just, fair reasonable," after considering following nonexclusive list factors: (1) changes Consumer Price Index; (2) charged comparable Escondido; (3) length time last increase; (4) capital issue; (5) taxes; (6) paid land; (7) utility charges; (8) operating maintenance expenses; (9) repairs than ordinary wear tear; (10) quality services affected tenant; (11) lawful existing lease. Ordinance 4(g), App. 11-12. 7 Irene Yee Friendly Hills Sunset Terrace Parks, both located city Escondido. few months adoption Escondido's suit San Diego County According complaint, "[t]he had effect plaintiffs [their] real tenants presently Park, well successors interest Plaintiff." Id., 3, ¶ 6. Yees requested damages six million dollars, declaration unconstitutional, injunction barring ordinance's enforcement. 5-6. 8 opposition city's demurrer, relied almost entirely Hall Santa Barbara, 833 F.2d 1270 (CA9 1987), cert. denied, 485 940, 108 1120, 99 281 (1988), held similar candidly admitted "in fact, decision used [as] guide drafting present Complaint." Tr. 318, Points Authorities Opposition Demurrer 4. nevertheless sustained demurrer Yees' complaint. Pet. Cert. C-42. 9 alone. Eleven suits shortly afterwards, dismissed. stipulation, 12 consolidated appeal; agreed submitted briefs oral 10 affirmed, primarily devoted expressing court's disagreement reasoning Hall. concluded: "Loretto way permanent landlord's therefore taking." 1358, (1990). Supreme denied review. B-41. 11 Eight twelve including Yees, joined certiorari. We granted certiorari, 502 ----, 294, 116 239 (1991), resolve conflict those federal Courts Appeals, Hall, Pinewood Estates Michigan Barnegat Township Leveling Board, 898 347 (CA3 1990). II statutes housing throughout country violate Clause. Brief 7, 10. Cf. Pennell Jose, 12, 6, 849, 858, (1988); 440, 3178. Instead, predicated unusual longer decide be. As result, according petitioners, reduction corresponding increase home, now owns, addition free market. L.Rev., 425. Because evict easily uses, goes, effectively perpetual tenant represents below-market indefinitely. And permits sell receive premium value. ordinance. conclude, transferred discrete land—the rent—from owner. what less 13 This argument, while perhaps scope cases, squared takings. "This element acquiescence heart concept occupation." FCC Florida Power 480 245, 252, 107 1107, 1112, 94 282 (1987). Thus floods landowner's Pumpelly Green Bay Co., Wall. 166, 20 L.Ed. 557 (1872), more suffer cable, Loretto, compelled invasion 14 conjunction thing. At least face scheme, State compels doing so. To contrary, albeit notice. 798.56(g). Put bluntly, invited forced government. Power, 252-253, 1112-1113. "right exclude" doubtless, assert, "one most essential sticks bundle rights commonly characterized property," Kaiser Aetna United States, 444 164, 176, 100 383, 391, 62 332 (1979), we find mere 15 statutory procedure changing practice "a kind gauntlet," Reply 10, 16. run gauntlet, applied accordingly confine ourselves statute. Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. DeBenedictis, 470, 493-495, 1232, 1246-1247, 472 different compel over objection refrain perpetuity terminating U.S., 251-252, S.Ct., 1111-1112, 6; see Nollan Coastal Comm'n, 483 825, 831-832, 3141, 3145-3146, 97 677 (1987); Fresh Pond Shopping Center, Inc. Callahan, 464 875, 877, 104 218, 219, 78 215 (1983) (Rehnquist, dissenting). 16 here consistently affirmed States broad power conditions general landlord-tenant particular paying injuries entails." 1112 ("statutes relations landlords takings"). decides place ceilings see, Pennell, 857-858, accept he like, Heart Atlanta Motel, 379 241, 261, 85 348, 359, 258 (1964), automatically having Pruneyard Center Robins, 447 74, 82-84, 2035, 2041-2042, 64 741 (1980). Such forms analyzed engaging "essentially ad hoc, inquiries" determine occurred. Aetna, 175, 390. words Holmes, "while regulated certain extent, goes too far recognized Pennsylvania Mahon, 260 393, 415, 43 158, 160, 67 322 (1922). 17 emphasize transfers Other regulation, said another. Ordinary reducing landlords' income monthly payments, although cause one-time occurs homes. Traditional zoning regulations whose activities prohibited neighbors; barred mining coal example, decline neighbor's rise. make visible case, Epstein, Control Theory Efficient Regulation, 54 Brooklyn 741, 758-759 existence 18 rely heavily allegation benefiting premiums. homes, like motor vehicles, ordinarily age. freedom reject significantly home. normally possession imposed. 430-431. correct citing difference alleged apartment anything (and charging "key money"), typical statute tenants. contrast, might shed light sufficient nexus objectives supposed advance. 834-835, 3147-3148. Whether 19 contention tenants.1 Again, relevant factor reviewing wish determining unjustly imposes "be compensated government, rather remain[ing] disproportionately concentrated persons." 124, 2659. open others, assert based inability exclude individuals. id., 259, 358 ("appellant 'right' select guests sees fit, governmental regulation"); 2041-2042. final line rests footnote rejected "the [the her permit cable property] building tenants." possibility insufficient defeat 3178 17. argue leave business order strictures forfeiture. fails base, simply rise forfeited. Had occupation, course, compensation, then lack condition waiver right. Nollan, 837, 3148. help 21 With respect takings, then, removed (1987), leased space poles television company cables. Federal Government, exercising authority pole attachment agreements, substantially reduced annual respondent's "it lease $7.15 remain $1.79." 1112. explained invitation, makes difference. separates [this case] unambiguous distinction . lessee interloper license." equally III 22 challenge additional grounds: Neither these us. A. 23 Nor raise Appeal. until review finally discretionary denial, expresses view merits. People Triggs, Cal.3d 884, 890-891, 106 408, 412, 506 P.2d 232, 236 (1973). short, courts, 24 judgments grant 28 U.S.C. 1257, has, rare exceptions, refused below. Illinois Gates, 462 213, 218-220, 103 2317, 2321-2323, 76 527 (1983). expressed inconsistent arising ibid., (In only. Carlson Green, 446 14, 2, 1468, 1470, (1980).) Even adhere it, B 25 preliminary assertion unripe sought increases. reason, Williamson Regional Planning Comm'n Hamilton Bank Johnson 473 172, 186-197, 105 3108, 3116-3122, 87 126 (1985), mount facial allege " 'substantially advance' 'legitimate interest' matter applied. 834, 3147; Agins Tiburon, 255, 260, 2138, 2141, 65 depend deprived pieces compensated, ripe. 495, 1247; Agins, 2141. 26 us unclear below: Portions complaint briefing read argument. For reason ambiguous issue. Yet stands posture 27 unquestionably took Clause, Once presented, party claim; precise Bankers Life Casualty Crenshaw, 486 71, 78, 1645, 1650, 219-220, 2322-2323; Dewey Des Moines, 173 193, 197-198, 379, 380-381, 665 (1899). ways, separate claims. single claim—that unconstitutional Having therefore, formulated litigant seeking possesses frame decided chooses, being manner framed rephrased petitioner, Ankenbrandt Richards, 855, 764 (1992), important Payne Tennessee, 498 111 1031, 1032 large petitioner himself controls presented. broadly narrowly fit. 29 framing consequences, "[o]nly forth petition, therein, Court." statement deemed comprise subsidiary therein," outside Berkemer McCarty, 468 420, 443, 38, 3138, 3152, 82 317 (1984). nature, disregard "only exceptional cases," Stone Powell, 428 465, 481, 15, 96 3037, 3046, 49 1067 (1976), 30 serves purposes. First, sharpen why Were routinely beyond opportunity advance worthy Where, unusual, involves issues seek formidable task conceivably outset, relieves 31 Second, Last Term alone received 5,000 petitions capacity small efficiently, enable entertain much efficiency vanish, feared prevail encouraged fill discussion forces enabling efficient resources. 32 pertaining Clause: "Two appeal departing tenant, representing rate ordinances, constitute[s] impermissible Was error appellate rulings hold fifth fourteenth amendments?" i. asks disagreeing holdings Appeals Third Ninth Circuits 1990), turn, ordinances Fairly construed, equivalent "Did err taking?" 33 complementary "fairly therein." Consideration occurred assist resolving well; other. Both embracing both—Was taking?—but exist side side, encompassing American National Trust Chicago Haroco, Inc., 606, 608, 3291, 3292, 437 (1985) (question adequately alleges conduct racketeering enterprise plaintiff through defendant's enterprise). 34 creates presumption. doubt institutional perspective results, know, takings; is, substantial jurisdiction includes largest population relatively percentage nation's Forum-shopping concern. Azul Pacifico, Los Angeles, 948 575, 579 1991) (mobile file court). sides Lytle Household Manufacturing, 494 545, 552, 110 1331, 1336, 504 (1990) ("Applying analysis facts full record determinations sensible exercise discretion"). apparently nation follow IV observation Loretto: "Our holding today narrow. affirm traditional entertains historically rooted expectation character qualitatively intrusive regulation. not, upholding State's impose appropriate property." 441, 3179. 36 respected again remains observe today. Loretto. judgment 37 Affirmed. 38 39 I agree conclude I, unlike ripe, 40 41 concur join except references significance allegations Strictly speaking, rents. product constitutionality never (The State, moreover, party.) understand subtle influence selection threatening prospective purchasers disfavored. type influence, consider.

Category: 3