Fletcher Properties, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, Poverty & Race Research Action ... (2024)

Citation: Fletcher Properties, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, Poverty & Race Research Action ... (2024)
Parent Document: Fletcher Properties, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, Poverty & Race Research Action ... (2024)
Jurisdiction: Minnesota (state)
Effective Date: 2024-01-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9461313/fletcher-properties-inc-v-city-... ↗

Full Text

1,352 chars

evicting a tenant constituted a taking and determining that plaintiffs’ per se physical-
takings claim was sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss); 301, 712, 2103, and 3151,
LLC v. City of Minneapolis, 27 F.4th 1377, 1383 (8th Cir. 2022) (declining to apply Yee
on the basis that, since the Supreme Court’s decision in Horne v. Dep’t of Agric., 576 U.S.
350 (2015), the Eighth Circuit had cited Horne and not Yee, reasoning that “an ordinance
that would require landlords to rent to individuals they would otherwise reject might be a
physical-invasion taking” (emphasis added)). First, these decisions are not binding on
Minnesota courts. Second, the United States Supreme Court has not overruled Yee, and it
cited Yee in Cedar Point Nursery. Cedar Point Nursery, 141 S. Ct. at 2072. Third, we see
no basis upon which we would conclude that Yee is no longer good law in light of Cedar
Point Nursery. See Heights Apartments, 30 F.4th at 733 (distinguishing Yee on the basis
that the “landlords in Yee sought to exclude future or incoming tenants, rather than existing
tenants”). We therefore see no reason to disregard existing United States Supreme Court
precedent. And to the extent Fletcher cites to Horne as support for its regulatory taking
argument, Horne is inapposite because the decision did not analyze whether a regulatory
taking occurred.

Other Sections in This Document (1336)

Full Text