New Hampshire
How City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd. applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Constitutional Law — Takings; Civil Rights (§1983); Land Use.
New Hampshire law upholds the principle that land-use regulations must not result in a taking without just compensation, consistent with the federal interpretation. The state's constitution also mirrors the Fifth Amendment's takings clause, affirming the necessity for proper substantiation in land-use decisions.
In New Hampshire, a taking occurs when property use is effectively denied or severely limited by governmental regulation without just compensation, placing significant emphasis on balancing state interests against property rights.
The court ruled that a taking occurred when the DOT's actions greatly diminished the value of the property without adequate compensation.
The court recognized that excessive regulations could constitute a taking if they deprive landowners of economically viable use.
The ruling held that local zoning laws that impose unreasonable restrictions might result in a compensable taking.
New Hampshire law aligns closely with the federal standard as articulated in City of Monterey, focusing on the necessity for just compensation when regulations effectively eliminate the economically viable use of property. However, New Hampshire may place a slightly greater burden on the state to justify the regulatory impact on private property rights.
Questions regarding takings and land-use regulations are crucial for the New Hampshire bar exam, particularly in light of the state's constitutional provisions mirroring federal standards.