•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This note argues that the North Carolina Supreme Court improperly decided Batch v. Town of Chapel Hill by ruling on a mere technicality. Instead the court should have focused on the nature of the town's ordinance and the required exaction and should have addressed Dr. Batch's takings claim. Proper analysis of Dr. Batch's claim indicates that the condition the Town of Chapel Hill imposed was an unconstitutional exaction. Part I of this note sets out the factual background and issues raised by the Batch decision and details the reasoning of both the North Carolina Court of Appeals and the North Carolina Supreme Court in ruling on the issues. Part II analyzes the courts' holdings on the takings claim issue and concludes that a taking did occur.

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.