State, Department of Natural Resources v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing importance of reasonable expectations in constitutional takings claims
• noting similarity between state and federal takings clauses and adopting approach of U.S. Supreme Court in Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986, 1000, 104 S.Ct. 2862, 81 L.Ed.2d 815 (1984)
• considering definition of \trade secret\ in determining whether appellee had a \property interest\ as part of unconstitutional-taking analysis and concluding that DNR did not effect an unconstitutional taking of the appellee's proprietary well-drilling data
• further finding no unfair surprise given statute authorizing DNR use and concluding regulatory statute was legitimate use of state’s police power for public welfare
• no takings to require disclosure of a secret oil database

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).