Reyes v. Flanagan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• collecting cases “reasoning that because the constitutional injury is not complete until the claim becomes ripe, the statute of limitations cannot accrue before that point in time”
• explaining the appropriate test in a facial takings challenge is whether passage of the law denies an owner economically viable use of property
• noting “[t]he relief sought is also relevant to whether the claim is a facial claim” and finding that a claim seeking declaration that an entire law is unconstitutional was a facial takings claim
• applying a burden-shifting framework to an affirmative defense on summary judgment
• “Even under [the continuing violation] doctrine, the ‘ongoing injuries’ or harmful ‘effects’ of a single unlawful act do not extend the limitations period.”
• “[I]t is clear that a facial takings challenge accrues at the time the offending statute or regulation is enacted or becomes effective.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).