What is LawBrain?
It's a living legal community making laws accessible and interactive. Click Here to get Started »

Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.

From lawbrain.com

Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (1982), was a property law case decided by the United States Supreme Court that dealt with regulatory takings as related to physical occupation.

  • This LawBrain entry is about a case that is commonly studied in law school. You can find, contribute to, and create other common 1L, 2L, and 3L cases in the Law School Cases category. And you can use the Opinon tab above to discuss hypos. For more information on editing, visit the LawBrain edit help page.


Summary of Case Facts

New York state enacted a regulation that allowed cable television operators to install its equipment on a landlord’s property without the landlord’s interference. For Loretto, this amounted to having a piece of equipment physically installed on the building. Loretto filed a class-action suit alleging that Teleprompter Manhattan’s actions had constituted a trespass and that the statute allowing their action allowed for a taking of her property without just compensation.


Does a permanent physical occupation of an owner’s property authorized by the government constitute a taking requiring the payment of just compensation?

Holding and Law

Yes. The court held that any permanent physical occupation of a private owner’s property, authorized by government, amounted to a taking requiring just compensation. The physical occupation of property, no matter how small, interferes with the owner’s right to exclusive possession of his or her property. Even though the physical presence of equipment in this case was very small it was still a physical occupation and thus a taking as provided by the Fifth Amendment. Just compensation must be paid.

Related Cases and Resources on LawBrain


FindLaw AHK, FindLaw John