Talk:Nollan v. California Coastal Commission

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reasoning section

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The "Reasoning" section of this article provides no sources. Nowhere in the full text of Scalia's ruling does he mention constructing a viewing platform on top of Nollan's house, though this sentence is in quotes, as if it had been taken directly from the ruling. He also doesn't give the parkland analogy that the author of this section provides.

The article has taken a turn for the worse. Its "Facts" and "Reasoning" now read as baldly biased that the case was wrongly decided. I am sure user Petethexman thinks it was, and I can sympathize with his plight, but even so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.150.170.36 (talk) 03:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic