No. 20-1212October Term 2020Decided Jun 28, 2021
Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco
This case arose after San Francisco required the owners of a unit in a building being converted to condominiums to offer their tenant a lifetime lease, and the owners claimed that condition amounted to an unconstitutional taking of their property.
Case status
- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released Jun 28, 2021
- What it's about
This case arose after San Francisco required the owners of a unit in a building being converted to condominiums to offer their tenant a lifetime lease, and the owners claimed that condition amounted to an unconstitutional taking of their property. The Supreme Court considered whether their federal takings claim was ready to be heard once the city had definitively denied them an exemption, or whether they first had to keep pursuing additional local administrative procedures.
Question presented
1. Can a takings plaintiff establish ripeness under Williamson County’s final decision rule where the local land use authority issued its final decision on a different project, before plaintiff refused to comply with and belatedly sought relief from a condition of project approval? 2. Does the unconstitutional conditions doctrine apply to a legislative condition imposed on every subdivision map issued through an expedited processing program in exchange for a fee refund, expedited processing of the map, increased property value, and other tangible benefits granted to all participating property owners?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Decision released Jun 28, 2021
- Area
Decided Supreme Court case
Timing
Decided June 28, 2021
The Court released its decision on June 28, 2021 without hearing oral argument.
Documents
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary-source trail available.
- Note
- Plain-English explainer. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 25, 2026
- Method
- Methodology