Florence Dolan v. City of Tigard
512 U.S. 374 · Decided June 24, 1994 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Florence Dolan v. City of Tigard was decided on June 24, 1994 by a vote of 5–4. The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, takings clause” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 512 U.S. 374 · 114 S. Ct. 2309 · 129 L. Ed. 2d 304 · 1994 U.S. LEXIS 4826
- Docket number
- 93-518
- Decided
- June 24, 1994
- Argued
- March 23, 1994
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, takings clause
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | |
| Justice David H. Souter | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Majority | |
| Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Dissent |
Full case caption
Florence Dolan v. City of Tigard
SCDB identifiers: case 1993-081, docket 1993-081-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, takings clause”
- Tina B. Bennis v. Michigan
- David H. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
- John K. Yee v. City of Escondido
- Bruce Babbitt v. Marvin K. Youpee, Sr.Law held unconstitutional
- Bernadine Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
- Thomas R. Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
Cases on the same legal provision: Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Agins et Ux. v. City of Tiburon
- Gurley v. Rhoden
- City of Pittsburgh v. Alco Parking Corp.
- United States v. Fuller et Ux.
- United States v. Grand River Dam Authority
- General Box Co. v. United States
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error