Multiple Choice
In Hearts Bluff Game Ranch v. U.S., Hearts purchased a large piece of land that the Army Corps said could be used as mitigation property for wetlands purposes. Later, the state of Texas announced it was building a water reservoir that would put Hearts under water, so it could no longer be used for wetlands mitigation. Hearts sued for uncompensated taking as the property was more valuable for mitigation than under a reservoir. The appeals court held that:
A) Texas would have to compensate Hearts for the value of the land as wetlands mitigation property, not as part of a reservoir
B) the Army Corps would have to compensate Hearts for the difference in the value of the land for wetlands mitigation versus as part of reservoir property
C) the EPA would have to compensate Hearts for the difference in the value of the land for wetlands mitigation versus as part of reservoir property
D) the wetlands mitigation permit process was arbitrary and capricious, so nothing Hearts was told by the Army Corp mattered and it had no rights to enforce
E) none of the other choices
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q291: Which of the following is NOT an
Q292: The Clean Air Act, which establishes federal
Q293: The Clinton administration did not submit the
Q294: Fact Pattern 18-2<br>Eldercare Hospital has acquired twenty
Q295: Air pollution permits are needed only for
Q297: In Babbitt v. Sweet Home, involving logging
Q298: Under the Clean Air Act, if a
Q299: Which of the following is a nonpoint
Q300: The person responsible for bringing a public
Q301: The State Implementation Plans required by the