Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff
467 U.S. 229 · Decided May 30, 1984 · 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
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff was decided on May 30, 1984 unanimously (8–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor 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
- 467 U.S. 229 · 104 S. Ct. 2321 · 81 L. Ed. 2d 186 · 1984 U.S. LEXIS 94
- Docket number
- 83-141
- Decided
- May 30, 1984
- Argued
- March 26, 1984
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 8–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Sandra Day O'Connor
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, takings clause
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
Did not participate: Thurgood Marshall.
Full case caption
Hawaii Housing Authority et Al v. Midkiff et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1983-109, docket 1983-109-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, takings clause”
- Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. v. United States
- Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.
- Summa Corp. v. California ex Rel. State Lands Commission
- United States v. 50 Acres of Land
- United States v. Locke
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City
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)
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.
- Calder v. Jones
- Summa Corp. v. California ex Rel. State Lands Commission
- Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 v. Vail
- Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S. A. v. Hall
- Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. v. United States
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