Connection lost
Server error
First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A church’s property was rendered unusable by a flood-control ordinance. The Supreme Court held that if a regulation denies a landowner all use of their property, the government must pay compensation for the period the regulation was effective, even if it is later rescinded.
Legal Significance: This landmark case established that the Just Compensation Clause requires a monetary remedy for “temporary” regulatory takings, rejecting the view that mere invalidation of the offending regulation is sufficient. It significantly raised the financial stakes for governmental land-use planning.
First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
First English Evangelical Lutheran Church owned a 21-acre property known as “Lutherglen,” which it operated as a campground and retreat for handicapped children. In 1978, a flood destroyed the campground’s buildings. In response, the County of Los Angeles enacted an interim ordinance prohibiting the construction or reconstruction of any building within a designated flood protection area that included Lutherglen. The ordinance was a safety measure intended to prevent future flood damage. The Church filed an inverse condemnation suit, alleging that the ordinance denied it all use of its property and constituted a taking requiring just compensation under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The California courts, relying on state precedent from Agins v. Tiburon, dismissed the takings claim. The state court’s rationale was that a landowner’s sole remedy for a regulatory taking is to have the regulation invalidated through a writ of mandamus or declaratory relief, not to sue for damages for the period the regulation was in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari, assuming for the purposes of the appeal that the ordinance had in fact denied the Church all use of its property.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment require a government to pay damages for the temporary deprivation of all use of a property caused by a land-use regulation that is ultimately found to constitute a taking?
Yes. A landowner who suffers a temporary regulatory taking that denies all Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerc
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment require a government to pay damages for the temporary deprivation of all use of a property caused by a land-use regulation that is ultimately found to constitute a taking?
Conclusion
This decision fundamentally altered regulatory takings jurisprudence by establishing that temporary takings Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut ali
Legal Rule
Where a government regulation effects a taking by denying a landowner all Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatu
Legal Analysis
Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for the majority, framed the issue as purely Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commo
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Fifth Amendment requires compensation for “temporary” regulatory takings. - A