This article needs additional citations for verification. (July 2012) |
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff | |
---|---|
Argued March 26th, 1984 Decided May 30th, 1984 | |
Full case name | Hawaii Housing Authority, et al. v. Midkiff, et al. |
Citations | 467 U.S. 229 (more) 104 S. Ct. 2321, 81 L. Ed. 2d 186, 1984 U.S. LEXIS 94 |
Case history | |
Prior | Summary judgment for defendant, Midkiff v. Tom, 483 F. Supp. 62 (D. Haw. 1979); reversed, 702 F.2d 788 (9th Cir. 1983); probable jurisdiction noted, 464 U.S. 932 (1983). |
Holding | |
The state can use eminent domain powers to redistribute concentrated property ownership to a larger group of people. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | O'Connor, joined by unanimous |
Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. V |
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state could use eminent domain to take land that was overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of private landowners and redistribute it to the wider population of private residents.[1]