CA Bar Exam 練習答案: Constitutional Law (Feb 2010)

Bar Review CourseのEssay答案は完璧すぎ＆長すぎて参考にならないという方向けに、過去に書きためた答案を公開していきます。公開するのは、私が実際に1時間計って解いた答案を、ギリギリ合格ラインまたは合格ライン少し上になるように手直ししたものです。手直しにあたっては、某Bar Review Courseの採点表を参照して、自己採点しています。

問題文

February 2010 Question 5
https://nwculaw.edu/pdf/bar/February%202010%20Essays%20and%20Sample%20Answers.pdf

Paula has owned and farmed a parcel consisting of 100 acres for many years. Last year, in compliance with County regulations, she expended a substantial amount of money in determining the economic feasibility of developing 10 acres of the parcel that border the shore of a small lake. She recently submitted a development application to County seeking to construct 30 homes on those 10 acres. County then determined that the 10 acres constitute protected wetlands that, under a state law enacted recently, had to be left undeveloped to protect certain endangered species. On that basis, County denied the development application.

Paula brought an action claiming that County’s denial of the development application constituted a regulatory taking in violation of the U.S. Constitution. It was stipulated that the 10 acres are worth $4,000,000 if development is permitted and $200,000 if it is not.

The trial court ruled that County’s denial of Paula’s development application did not constitute either (1) a total or (2) a partial taking.

Did the trial court correctly rule that County’s denial of Paula’s development application did not constitute:
1. A total taking? Discuss.
2. A partial taking? Discuss.

答案

なかなかしっかり準備する機会のない、the taking clause を正面から問う問題です。本問をやれば takings の基本的なところは全て押さえられるので、ぜひ一度書いてみてください。