Knick, v. Township Of Scott

139 S. Ct. 2162 (2019)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Knick (P) owns 90 acres of land. P lives in a single-family home on the property and uses the rest of the land as a grazing area for horses and other farm animals. The property includes a small graveyard where the ancestors of Knick’s neighbors are buried. Such family cemeteries are fairly common. D passed an ordinance requiring that “all cemeteries . . . be kept open and accessible to the general public during daylight hours.” A “cemetery” was defined as “a place or area of ground, whether contained on private or public property, which has been set apart for or otherwise utilized as a burial place for deceased human beings.” “Code enforcement” officers were given the authority to “enter upon any property” to determine the existence and location of a cemetery. An officer found grave markers on P’s property and notified her that she was violating the ordinance. P sought declaratory and injunctive relief in state court on the ground that the ordinance affected a taking of her property. P did not seek compensation with an “inverse condemnation” action under state law. D withdrew the violation notice and agreed to stay enforcement of the ordinance during the state court proceedings. The court refused to rule on P's declaratory and injunctive relief because, without an ongoing enforcement action, she could not demonstrate the irreparable harm necessary for equitable relief. P filed a federal action under 42 U. S. C. §1983 under the Fifth Amendment. The Court dismissed the claim because she had not pursued an inverse condemnation action in state court under Williamson. The Third Circuit affirmed and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.