1. SUMMARY OF LAST CLASS PHYSICAL TAKINGS: LORETTO MODERN TAKINGS: PENN CENTRAL AD HOC APPROACH THE SPECTRE OF EUCLID INVESTMENT-BACKED EXPECTATIONS LUCAS: THE NEW PER SE RULE RATIONALEEXCEPTIONS

2. STRUCTURE OF LUCAS EMPHASIS ON PER SE RULES (DISTINGUISH PENN CENTRAL) 2 DISCRETE AREAS OF PER SE TAKINGS: 1. PHYSICAL INVASION 2. DENIAL OF ALL ECONOMICALLY BENEFICIAL OR PRODUCTIVE USE DERIVATION: AGINS (LATER MODIFIED) WHAT IS TOTAL DEPRIVATION? FN. 7

3. JUSTIFICATIONS AND RESPONSES S.C. JUSTIFICATION FOR ALL ECONOMICALLY VIABLE USE TAKEN:NOXIOUS USE CASES SCALIA RESPONSE: 1. PENN CENTRAL—THIS WAS EARLY ATTEMPT TO DESCRIBE THEORY OF POLICE POWER 2. NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN BENEFIT- CONFERRING AND HARM-PREVENTING

4. EXCEPTIONS TO CATEGORICAL TAKINGS RULE EXCEPTION: PROSCRIBED USES (BY REGULATION) WERE NOT PART OF TITLE TO BEGIN WITH EXAMPLE: NUISANCE FACTORS WILL S. CAROLINA REGULATION FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY?

5. EXTENDING LUCAS? TAHOE- SIERRA THE MORATORIA IN QUESTION PURPOSELENGTH PURPOSE OF BI-STATE COMPACT DANGER TO LAKE TAHOE

6. TAHOE-SIERRA: THE PS ARGUMENT THE PER SE TAKING ARGUMENT --FACIAL ATTACK --TEMPORAL SEGMENTATION --RELATION TO PREVIOUS CASES: 1. PENN CENTRAL 2. LEASEHOLD CASES 3. PHYSICAL TAKINGS: LORETTO 4. LUCAS

7. THE HOLDING IN TAHOE-SIERRA REFUSAL TO APPLY PER SE RULE 1. PHYSICAL v. REGULATORY TAKINGS 2. LOOK AT “PARCEL AS A WHOLE” 3. DISTINGUISH LUCAS: FEE SIMPLE 4. EFFECT ON PLANNING PROCESS 5. CAN’T DISTINGUISH PERMIT DELAY APPLYING PENN CENTRAL MORE THAN ONE YEAR DOUBTFUL?