New Hampshire
How Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Constitutional Law—Takings and Substantive Due Process.
New Hampshire follows similar principles to the federal standard regarding takings and substantive due process, emphasizing fairness and reasonableness in government actions. The state's courts assess whether legislation constitutes a taking by evaluating its economic impact on property owners and the overall public utility.
In New Hampshire, a taking occurs if government action results in a substantial and permanent invasion of property rights without just compensation, guided by principles of fairness and due process.
Affirmed that state regulatory actions can constitute a taking if they permanently deprive property owners of economically viable use.
Held that zoning regulations not only need to serve a legitimate public purpose but also must avoid excessive burden on private property.
Established that government actions must adhere to due process requirements to avoid infringing on property rights.
New Hampshire's approach aligns closely with the federal standards outlined in Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel, particularly concerning the balancing of public interest against private property rights. However, state courts may impose a higher threshold for determining what constitutes a permissible regulation versus a compensable taking.
Questions on the New Hampshire bar exam may involve takings jurisprudence, particularly in scenarios involving property regulations and their impact on owners' rights.