Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Section 14

Citation
Section 14
Parent Document
Troy Ltd. v. Renna, 727 F.2d 287 (1984)
Effective Date
1984-01-30

Other Sections in This Document (102)

Full Text

790 chars
We also hold that the Tenancy Act is not a taking for a “public use.”12 The installation at issue in Loretto is the exemplar of a public use. The challenged New York law authorized an occupation of private property by a common carrier, Teleprompter, engaged in a classic public utility function.13 The carrier’s installation of “crossover” and “noncrossover” cables on the plaintiff’s roof, 458 U.S. at 422, 102 S.Ct. at 3180, afforded broadcasters a common means of communication with tenants in the plaintiff’s building and in the adjacent area. Consequently, Loretto cannot reasonably be read without an awareness of the public use involved in the taking. Loretto plainly does not hold that a “permanent physical occupation” is a taking without regard for the public use of the property.