State ex rel. AWMS Water Solutions, L.L.C. v. Mertz

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that AWMS failed to prove that the State’s suspension of operations at a saltwater-injection well deprived its leasehold of all economically beneficial use, so no total regulatory taking occurred. The court further held that the Penn Central factors did not establish a compensable partial regulatory taking because the economic impact did not outweigh the State’s public-health and safety purpose and the limited interference with AWMS’s investment-backed expectations. The court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and denied the writ of mandamus.

Holdings

1. The suspension order did not effect a total or categorical taking because AWMS failed to prove that it was deprived of all economically beneficial use of its leasehold.
2. The suspension order was not a compensable partial regulatory taking because the Penn Central factors, properly balanced, weighed against AWMS.
3. The Eleventh District's judgment did not need to be vacated because a successor judge participated in the three-judge panel after the trial.
4. AWMS was not entitled to a writ of mandamus compelling the State to institute eminent-domain proceedings because it had no clear legal right to compensation for a regulatory taking.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the suspension of well #2 deprived AWMS of all economically beneficial use of its leasehold and therefore constituted a total regulatory taking under Lucas.
2. Whether the suspension constituted a compensable partial regulatory taking under the three Penn Central factors.
3. Whether the Eleventh District erred by allowing a successor judge who had not observed the trial testimony to participate in the decision.
4. Whether the court of appeals exceeded the scope of remand or improperly limited potential damages.
5. Whether the State's nuisance defense barred AWMS's takings claim.

Disposition

other