Terry Wilkins v. David Daniels

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[i]t is important at the outset to distinguish” the “two different types of Takings Clause challenges”
• “Plaintiffs have a limited property interest in their exotic animals . . . such that a fundamental constitutional right is not implicated.”
• “Plaintiffs have a limited property interest in their exotic animals or dangerous wild animals (as described in the Act), such that a fundamental Constitutional right is not implicated.”
• “With respect to just-compensation challenges, while Williamson County’s first requirement may not apply to facial challenges, its second requirement—that plaintiffs must seek just compensation through state procedures—does.” (citations omitted)
• “With respect to just-compensation challenges, while Williamson County’s first requirement may not apply to facial challenges, its second requirement--that plaintiffs must seek just compensation through state procedures--does.” (citations omitted)
• A “general principle of compelled speech jurisprudence . . . is that a violation of the First Amendment right against compelled speech occurs only in the context of actual compulsion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).