KV
Kelo v. City of New London
Court Case·AI Enriched
Relationships:1
Events:6
Library:3
Confidence:
95%
Key Facts
Type
Court Case
Sector
Not specified
Industry
Not specified
Status
Draft
Country
United States
Also Known As
Kelo v. New London
Tags
eminent domainTakings ClauseFifth AmendmentFourteenth Amendmentproperty rightseconomic developmenturban renewal
Overall Confidence
95%
Internal Notes
No notes
Key Information
Positions
No positions added
Case Number
545 U.S. 469 (2005)
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Connecticut
Filing Date
Not specified
Case Status
Closed
Case Type
Civil
Plaintiffs
Susette KeloWilhelmina Deryother Fort Trumbull property owners
Defendants
City of New London, ConnecticutNew London Development Corporation
About
Landmark Supreme Court case that expanded the definition of 'public use' under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause to include economic development benefits, even when property is transferred to private entities, thereby allowing the use of eminent domain for private economic development.
Key Relationships
SG
Scott G. Bullock
represented
Bullock was the primary attorney who argued this landmark case before the U.S. Supreme Court on February 22, 2005. The loss (5-4) paradoxically led to a massive nationwide legislative backlash against eminent domain, which Bullock and IJ spearheaded.
Since 2000
Recent Events
Authored Majority Opinion in Kelo v. City of New London
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the majority opinion for the Supreme Court decision
6/23/2005
Authored Principal Dissenting Opinion in Kelo v. City of New London
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the principal dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court case
6/23/2005
Served as Lead Counsel for Petitioners
Scott G. Bullock represented the petitioners in the Supreme Court case
1/1/2005
Served as Lead Counsel for Respondents
Wesley W. Horton represented the respondents in the Supreme Court case
1/1/2005
Became Lead Plaintiff in Kelo v. City of New London
Susette Kelo served as lead plaintiff in the eminent domain case
1/1/2002