AICP Law Cases Test Questions And
Answers
Mugler v Kansas - Answer - 1887, 14th amendment due process case which rules that Kansas could
prohibit sale of alcohol based on police power.
Welch v Swasey - Answer - 1909, Boston can impose different height limits on buildings in different
districts
Eubank v City of Richmond - Answer - 1912, A zoning ordinance establishing building setback lines was
held unconstitutional and not a valid use of the police power; violates the due process of law and is
therefore unconstitutional under the 14th amendment.
Hadacheck v Sebastian - Answer - 1915, Supreme Court upheld Los Angeles case prohibiting
establishment of a preexisting brickyard declared a "public nuisance."
Pennsylvania Coal Company v Mahon - Answer - 1922, Supreme Court indicated for the first time that a
regulation of land use might be a taking if it goes too far.
Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co - Answer - 1926, Established zoning as a legal use of police power
by local government. The main issue in this case was "nuisance," and that a certain use near a residence
could be considered "a pig in a parlor." Argued by Alfred Betteman, future 1st president of the ASPO.
Nectow v City of Cambridge - Answer - 1928, Court found for Nectow and against a provision in
Cambridge's zoning ordinance based on the due process clause. However, it did NOT overturn Euclid.
This was the last zoning challenge to come before the Supreme Court until...
Berman v Parker - Answer - 1954, Established aesthetics and redevelopment as valid public purposes
for exercising eminent domain. Washington D.C. took private property and resold to a developer to
achieve objectives of an established redevelopment plan.
Jones v Mayer - Answer - 1968, Ruling that discrimination in selling houses was not permitted based on
the 13th Amendment and Section 1982 abolishing slavery and creating equality for all U.S. citizens.
, Cheney v Village 2 at New Hope - Answer - 1968, Legitimized planning unit development (PUD) process.
Golden v Planning Board of the Town of Ramapo - Answer - 1972, NY State Court of Appeals case that
upheld a growth control plan based on the availability of public services. Case further emphasized the
importance of the Comp Plan and set the scene for nationwide growth management plans.
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v Volpe - Answer - 1971, Established hard look doctrine for
environmental impact review. Section 4(f) DOT Act of 1966 -- park use ok if no "feasible and prudent"
alternative and "all possible planning to minimize harm."
Calvert Cliff's Coordinating Committee v Atomic Energy Commission - Answer - 1971, Made National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements judicially enforceable.
Sierra Club v Morton - Answer - 1972, Opened up environmental citizen suits to discipline resource
agencies.
Just v Marinett County - Answer - 1972, Significantly integrated public trust theories into a modern
regulatory scheme. Shoreland zoning ordinance along navigable streams and other water bodies upheld.
Fasano v Board of Commissions of Washington Co, Oregon - Answer - 1973, Required zoning to be
consistent with comp plans, and recognized that rezonings may be judicial rather than legislative.
Central issue was spot zoning, which must meet the two measures to be deemed valid: 1st there must
be a public need for the change in question, and 2nd the need must be best served by changing the
zoning of the particular parcel in question as compared with other available property.
Village of Belle Terre v Boraas - Answer - 1974, Supreme Court upheld the restrictive definition of a
family as being no more than two unrelated people living together.
South Burlington County NAACP v Township of Mount Laurell I - Answer - 1974, NJ Supreme Court held
that in developing municipalities in growing and expanding areas, provision must be made to
accommodate a fair share of low and moderate income housing.
Answers
Mugler v Kansas - Answer - 1887, 14th amendment due process case which rules that Kansas could
prohibit sale of alcohol based on police power.
Welch v Swasey - Answer - 1909, Boston can impose different height limits on buildings in different
districts
Eubank v City of Richmond - Answer - 1912, A zoning ordinance establishing building setback lines was
held unconstitutional and not a valid use of the police power; violates the due process of law and is
therefore unconstitutional under the 14th amendment.
Hadacheck v Sebastian - Answer - 1915, Supreme Court upheld Los Angeles case prohibiting
establishment of a preexisting brickyard declared a "public nuisance."
Pennsylvania Coal Company v Mahon - Answer - 1922, Supreme Court indicated for the first time that a
regulation of land use might be a taking if it goes too far.
Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co - Answer - 1926, Established zoning as a legal use of police power
by local government. The main issue in this case was "nuisance," and that a certain use near a residence
could be considered "a pig in a parlor." Argued by Alfred Betteman, future 1st president of the ASPO.
Nectow v City of Cambridge - Answer - 1928, Court found for Nectow and against a provision in
Cambridge's zoning ordinance based on the due process clause. However, it did NOT overturn Euclid.
This was the last zoning challenge to come before the Supreme Court until...
Berman v Parker - Answer - 1954, Established aesthetics and redevelopment as valid public purposes
for exercising eminent domain. Washington D.C. took private property and resold to a developer to
achieve objectives of an established redevelopment plan.
Jones v Mayer - Answer - 1968, Ruling that discrimination in selling houses was not permitted based on
the 13th Amendment and Section 1982 abolishing slavery and creating equality for all U.S. citizens.
, Cheney v Village 2 at New Hope - Answer - 1968, Legitimized planning unit development (PUD) process.
Golden v Planning Board of the Town of Ramapo - Answer - 1972, NY State Court of Appeals case that
upheld a growth control plan based on the availability of public services. Case further emphasized the
importance of the Comp Plan and set the scene for nationwide growth management plans.
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v Volpe - Answer - 1971, Established hard look doctrine for
environmental impact review. Section 4(f) DOT Act of 1966 -- park use ok if no "feasible and prudent"
alternative and "all possible planning to minimize harm."
Calvert Cliff's Coordinating Committee v Atomic Energy Commission - Answer - 1971, Made National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements judicially enforceable.
Sierra Club v Morton - Answer - 1972, Opened up environmental citizen suits to discipline resource
agencies.
Just v Marinett County - Answer - 1972, Significantly integrated public trust theories into a modern
regulatory scheme. Shoreland zoning ordinance along navigable streams and other water bodies upheld.
Fasano v Board of Commissions of Washington Co, Oregon - Answer - 1973, Required zoning to be
consistent with comp plans, and recognized that rezonings may be judicial rather than legislative.
Central issue was spot zoning, which must meet the two measures to be deemed valid: 1st there must
be a public need for the change in question, and 2nd the need must be best served by changing the
zoning of the particular parcel in question as compared with other available property.
Village of Belle Terre v Boraas - Answer - 1974, Supreme Court upheld the restrictive definition of a
family as being no more than two unrelated people living together.
South Burlington County NAACP v Township of Mount Laurell I - Answer - 1974, NJ Supreme Court held
that in developing municipalities in growing and expanding areas, provision must be made to
accommodate a fair share of low and moderate income housing.
