This story might be said to have had its roots millions of years ago.
It is about coal, after all. Anthracite coal, to be exact.
But that -- and today's date -- should give you a clue that, as we teased in this post a mere 28 days ago (the Supreme Court worked hard and fast in those days), today, Sunday, December 11, 2022, is the 100th birthday of the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (Dec. 11, 1922).
True, what became known as the "regulatory takings" doctrine did not spring from whole cloth on December 11, 1922, but had been bouncing around in the common law for quite a while (see here and here for example).
But if you want to mark and official birthday for regulatory takings, you could not do better than Pennsylvania Coal (aka Mahon).
The case that launched a thousand academic tenure quests! The case that asks the oh-so-Holmesian question "how far is too far?" (and "too far" into what or from what- the owner's rights, the government's powers?). The case responsible for instructional videos. For law student cheat sheets. For wikis. For beaucoup online PowerPoint slide shows. For flashcards, for heaven's sake.
A case cited nearly 10,000 times (thanks Westlaw):
And still kicking, despite calls for its overruling, and claims it has been sub silentio abrogated ("Abrogated?" I don't think so):
Eight-to-one, with only Justice Brandeis (predictably) in dissent.
We spent today -- a wet and snowy one -- with a colleague (and now friend) at the actual property that gave rise to the litigation in Pittston, Pennsylvania, visiting the site, talking to the present and former owners of the Mahon home, and learning more about the case, the people involved, the arguments, and the history and process of anthracite coal mining that led to the dispute.
You know the short story as set out in the Supreme Court's opinion. But you may not know the details. So in a series of upcoming posts, we'll bring you some of the more interesting aspects of the case.
Today, as we discussed the decision in what was, a century ago, Harold John Mahon, Esq.'s office (he was a lawyer you know, and along with co-counsel repped himself in the Supreme Court), we imagined that this might have been what he saw when he received the telegraph from Washington, D.C. on December 11, 1922, notifying him that the Court had ruled against him:
Before the day was through, we paid a visit to Mr. Mahon at the nearby cemetery, just to let him know that there are no hard feelings, and that the regulatory takings doctrine his case spawned is alive if not entirely well.
Here, at the Craig-Mahon family plot, he lies in repose with Mrs. Mahon.
Her story takes a most interesting twist (more on that in future posts).
So stay tuned. This post is just a teaser because we just had to post something today, in recognition of the 100th anniversary of the opinion.
But more will come on the Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon story.
Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (Dec. 11, 1922)
