Bart Didden used to own a property in Port Chester, N.Y., on which he had plans to build a CVS pharmacy.Bart Didden used to own a property in Port Chester Port Chester, village (1990 pop. 24,728), Westchester co., SE N.Y., a suburb of New York City, on Long Island Sound at the mouth of the Byram River, and on the Conn. border; settled after 1660, inc. 1868. Primarily residential, it produces some household goods. Gen. , N.Y., on which he had plans to build a CVS (1) (Concurrent Versions System) A version control system for Unix that was initially developed as a series of shell scripts in the mid-1980s. CVS maintains the changes between one source code version and another and stores all the changes in one file. pharmacy. His property, however, was within a designated "redevelopment area," and G & S Port Chester, the developer charged with revitalizing the area, decided it wanted to build a Walgreens there. Village officials encouraged G & S to reach an agreement with Didden. According to according to prep. 1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians. 2. In keeping with: according to instructions. 3. Didden, the owner of G & S made him a simple proposal: If Didden did not want his property seized under eminent domain eminent domain, the right of a government to force the owner of private property sell it if it is needed for a public use. The right is based on the doctrine that a sovereign state has dominion over all lands and buildings within its borders, which has its origins in , he would either pay G & S $800,000 or give it a 50 percent stake in the CVS. Didden refused, and the next day his property was seized. Didden sued Port Chester. The case made it to a circuit court of appeals, which upheld a lower court's decision in favor of Port Chester, citing both a statute-of-limitations restriction and the precedent of Kelo v. City of New London Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)[1], was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. . The Constitution requires that the government take property only for a "public use." Ensuring that a developer is not deprived of any possible profits resulting from a redevelopment would not seem to qualify. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion