Property and Privacy Rights
Property and Privacy Rights are a category that deserves a subsite of
its own. In recent decades there has been a steady erosion of such rights,
despite a few gains, which trend toward the reduction of estates in land into
tenancies at will, seizure and forfeiture of property without conviction of a
crime, and intrusion into private spaces.
Organizations and Activists
Administrative and Trial Level
Federal Appeal Courts
- Freeman v. Dallas, 97-10907,
5th Cir. — After winning damages against City of Dallas in trial for
demolition of a building deemed a nuisance, on appeal it was decided that
search warrant not needed, but reasonableness of of the action leaves open an
appeal to the Supreme Court under the takings clause.
U.S. Supreme Court
- Camara v. Municipal
Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967) — Building inspector must obtain
warrant to inspect building if owner does not consent to it.
- Hafer v. Melo, 502
U.S. 21 (1991) — State officers may be held personally liable for damages
based upon actions taken in their official capacities.
- Soldal v. Cook County,
506 U.S. 56 (1992) — State or local officials who stand by or protect an
unlawful eviction or seizure are liable for damages under 42 USC 1983.
- Bennis v. Michigan,
517 U.S. 1163 (1996) — Property used in a crime may be forfeited even
though partly or wholly owned by an innocent third party.
- Palazzolo v. Rhode
Island, Docket 99-2047 (Decided Jun. 28, 2001) — A state land-use
regulation may present standing to a subsequent owner for compensation under
the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.