Aron, Stephen. “Pioneers and Profiteers: Land Speculation and the Homestead Ethic in Frontier Kentucky.” Western Historical Quarterly 23, no. 2 (1992): 179–98.
Atack, Jeremy, and Passell, Peter. A New Economic View of American History. 2nd edition. New York: W. W. Norton, 1994.
Baltimore Sun, 31 May 1984.
Banner, Stuart. Who Owns the Sky? The Struggle to Control Airspace from the Wright Brothers On. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008.
Barzel, Yoram. Economic Analysis of Property Rights. 2nd edition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Bell, Abraham, and Parchomovsky, Gideon. “The Uselessness of Public Use.” Columbia Law Review 106, no. 6 (2006): 1412–49.
Benedict, Jeff. Little Pink House: A True Story of Defiance and Courage. New York: Grand Central Publishing, 2009.
Bogart, Dan, and Richardson, Gary. “Making Property Productive: Reorganizing Rights to Real and Equitable Estates in Britain, 1660–1830.” European Review of Economic History 13. no. 1 (2009): 3–30.
Bogue, Allan G. “The Iowa Claim Clubs: Symbol and Substance.” In The Public Lands: Studies in the History of the Public Domain, edited byCarstensen, Vernon, 47–69. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1963.
Boone, Catherine. “Property and Constitutional Order: Land Tenure Reform and the Future of the African State.” African Affairs 106, no. 425 (2007): 557–86.
Boyd, Julian P., et al. The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. 36 Vols. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1950–2009.
Brooks, Richard O., et al. The Supreme Court and Takings: Four Essays. South Royalton: Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, 2005.
Caro, Robert A.The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. New York: Vintage, 1975.
Cincone, Gia L.“Land Reform and Corporate Redistribution: The Republican Legacy.” Stanford Law Review 39, no. 5 (1987): 1229–57.
A Citizen (David Henshaw). An Appeal to the Good Sense of the Legislature and the Community in Favor of a New Bridge to South Boston. Boston: True and Greene, 1825.
Clay, Karen B.“Property Rights and Institutions: Congress and the California Land Act of 1851.” The Journal of Economic History 59, no. 1 (1999): 122–42.
Cushman, Robert Eugene.Excess Condemnation. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1917.
De Alessi, Louis. “The Economics of Property Rights: A Review of the Evidence.” Research in Law and Economics 2 (1980): 1–47.
Demsetz, Harold. “Toward a Theory of Property Rights.” American Economic Review 57, no. 2 (1967): 347–59.
de Soto, Hernando. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books, 2000.
Einhorn, Robin L.“Species of Property: The American Property-Tax Uniformity Clauses Reconsidered.” The Journal of Economic History 61, no. 4 (2001): 974–1008.
Ellickson, Robert C.“Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls.” University of Chicago Law Review 40, no. 4 (1973): 681–781.
Engerman, Stanley L., and Sokoloff, Kenneth L.. “Factor Endowments, Inequality, and Paths of Development Among New World Economies.” Economía 3, no. 1 (2002): 41–109.
Engerman, Stanley L.Economic Development in the Americas Since 1500: Endowments and Institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.
Engerman, Stanley L. “Once Upon a Time in the Americas: Land and Immigration Policies in the New World.” In Understanding Long-Run Economic Growth: Geography, Institutions, and the Knowledge Economy, edited byCosta, Dora L. and Lamoreaux, Naomi R.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, forthcoming.
Epstein, Richard A.Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.
Epstein, Richard A.“Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council: A Tangled Web of Expectations.” Stanford Law Review 45, no. 5 (1993): 1369–92.
Fleck, Robert K., and Hanssen, F. Andrew. “Repeated Adjustment of Delegated Powers and the History of Eminent Domain.” International Review of Law and Economics 30, no. 2 (2010): 90–112.
Garnett, Nicole Stelle.“The Neglected Political Economy of Eminent Domain.” Michigan Law Review 105, no. 1 (2006): 101–50.
Gates, Paul W.“Tenants of the Log Cabin.” Mississippi Valley Historical Review 9, no. 1 (1962): 3–31.
Gates, Paul W.History of Public Land Law Development. Washington, DC: GPO, 1968.
Harper's Magazine, October 2005.
Hart, John F.“The Maryland Mill Act, 1669–1766: Economic Policy and the Confiscatory Redistribution of Private Property.” American Journal of Legal History 39, no. 1 (1995): 1–24.
Hart, John F.“Property Rights, Costs, and Welfare: Delaware Water Mill Legislation, 1719–1859.” Journal of Legal Studies 27, no. 2 (1998): 455–71.
Hartford Courant, various issues.
Horwitz, Morton J.The Transformation of American Law, 1780–1860. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977.
Jacobs, Harvey M., and Bassett, Ellen M.. “All Sound, No Fury? Assessing the Impacts of State-Based Kelo Laws on Planning Practice.” Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Working Paper No. WP10HJ1, Cambridge, MA, March 2010.
Jeon, Yoong-Deok, and Kim, Young-Yong. “Land Reform, Income Redistribution, and Agricultural Production in Korea.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 48, no. 2 (2000): 253–68.
Kanazawa, Mark. “Efficiency in Western Water Law: The Development of the California Doctrine, 1850–1911.” Journal of Legal Studies 27, no. 1 (1998): 159–85.
Kanazawa, Mark. “Origins of Common-Law Restrictions on Water Transfers: Groundwater Law in Nineteenth-Century California.” Journal of Legal Studies 32, no. 1 (2003): 153–80.
Kens, Paul. Lochner v. New York: Economic Regulation on Trial. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1998.
Koo, Anthony Y. C.“Economic Consequences of Land Reform in Taiwan.” Asian Survey 6, no. 3 (1966): 150–57.
Kuhn, Thomas S.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Kutler, Stanley I.Privilege and Creative Destruction: The Charles River Bridge Case. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, 1971.
La Croix, Sumner J., Mak, James, and Rose, Louis A.. “The Political Economy of Urban Land Reform in Hawaii.” Urban Studies 32, no. 6 (1995): 999–1015.
La Croix, Sumner J., and Rose, Louis A.. “Public Use, Just Compensation, and Land Reform in Hawaii.” Research in Law and Economics 17 (1995): 47–82.
Leshy, John D.“A Conversation About Takings and Water Rights.” Texas Law Review 83, no. 7 (2005): 1985–2026.
Levmore, Saul. “Two Stories About the Evolution of Property Rights.” Journal of Legal Studies 31, no. 2, pt. 2 (2002): S421–51.
Libecap, Gary D.Contracting for Property Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Libecap, Gary D.Owens Valley Revisited: A Reassessment of the West's First Great Water Transfer. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2007.
Libecap, Gary D., and Lueck, Dean. “The Demarcation of Land and the Role of Coordinating Institutions.” NBER Working Paper No. 14942, Cambridge, MA, May 2009.
Lopez, Alberto B.“Revisiting Kelo and Eminent Domain's 'Summer of Scrutiny.'” Alabama Law Review 59, no. 3 (2008): 561–610.
Los Angeles Times, 31 May 1984.
McCormick, Charles T.“The Measure of Compensation in Eminent Domain,” Minnesota Law Review 17, no. 5 (1933): 461–98.
McCurdy, Charles W.The Anti-Rent Era in New York Law and Politics, 1839–1865. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001.
Miller, Gordon R.“Shaping California Water Law, 1781 to 1928.” Southern California Quarterly 55, no. 1 (1973): 9–42.
Miller, M. Catherine.“Riparian Rights and the Control of Water in California, 1879–1928: The Relationship Between an Agricultural Enterprise and Legal Change.” Agricultural History 59, no. 1 (1985): 1–24.
Mittal, Sonia, and Weingast, Barry. “Self-Enforcing Constitutions: With an Application to Democratic Stability in America's First Century.” Stanford University Working Paper, Stanford, CA, July 2010.
Munch, Patricia. “An Economic Analysis of Eminent Domain.” Journal of Political Economy 84, no. 3 (1976): 473–98.
New York. Report of the Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1821, Assembled for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution of the State of New York. Albany, NY: E. & E. Hosford, 1821.
New York Times, various dates.
Nichols, Philip Jr. “The Meaning of Public Use in the Law of Eminent Domain.” Boston University Law Review 20, no. 4 (1940): 615–41.
North American Review, June 1889.
North, Douglass C., and Weingast, Barry R.. “Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England.” The Journal of Economic History 49, no. 4 (1989): 803–32.
Note. “Eminent Domain. Excess Condemnation. Condemnation for Purpose of Raising Funds.” Yale Law Journal 39, no. 1 (1929): 128–29.
Note. “The Public Use Limitation on Eminent Domain: An Advance Requiem.” Yale Law Journal 58, no. 4 (1949): 599–614.
Pisani, Donald J.“Enterprise and Equity: A Critique of Western Water Law in the Nineteenth Century.” Western Historical Quarterly 18, no. 1 (1987): 15–37.
Pisani, Donald J.“Squatter Law in California, 1850–1858.” Western Historical Quarterly 25, no. 3 (1994): 277–310.
Priest, Claire. “Creating an American Property Law: Alienability and Its Limits in American History.” Harvard Law Review 120, no. 2 (2006): 385–459.
Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph. What is Property? An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government. 1840 edn.; n.p.: Forgotten Books, 2008, available at http://books.google.com/books?id=KZcysiWmMoQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=proudhon+what+is+property&hl=en&ei=_uZnTO_DBsXflgeJ1dmeBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false.
Review of the Case of the Free Bridge, Between Boston and Charlestown. Boston: Dutton & Wentworth, 1827.
Robbins, Roy M.“Preemption—A Frontier Triumph.” Mississippi Valley Historical Review 18, no. 3 (1931): 331–49.
Robbins, Roy M.Our Landed Heritage: The Public Domain, 1776–1936. New York: Peter Smith, 1950.
Rose, Carol M.“Energy and Efficiency in the Realignment of Common-Law Water Rights.” Journal of Legal Studies 19, no. 2 (1990): 261–96.
Rosenthal, Jean-Laurent. “The Development of Irrigation in Provence, 1700–1860: The French Revolution and Economic Growth.” The Journal of Economic History 50, no. 3 (1990): 615–38.
Sax, Joseph L.“Some Thoughts on the Decline of Private Property.” Washington Law Review 58, no. 3 (1983): 481–96.
Sax, Joseph L.“Property Rights and the Economy of Nature: Understanding Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council.” Stanford Law Review 45, no. 5 (1993): 1433–55.
Sax, Joseph L.“Kelo: A Case Rightly Decided.” University of Hawai'i Law Review 28, no. 2 (2006): 365–72.
Scheiber, Harry N.“Property Law, Expropriation, and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789–1910.” The Journal of Economic History 33, no. 1 (1973): 232–51.
Scheiber, Harry N., and McCurdy, Charles W.. “Eminent Domain Law and Western Agriculture, 1849–1900.” Agricultural History 49, no. 1 (1975): 112–30.
Shaw, Lemuel. Reasons, Principally of a Public Nature, Against a New Bridge from Charlestown to Boston. Boston: Wells and Lilly, 1825.
Supreme Court of California, 1886.
Supreme Court of Michigan, 1981.
Tatter, Henry. “The Preferential Treatment of the Actual Settler in the Primary Disposition of the Vacant Lands in the United States to 1841.” Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University, 1933.
Taylor, George Rogers.The Transportation Revolution, 1815–1860. New York: Rinehart, 1951.
Toll, Seymour I.Zoned American. New York: Grossman, 1969.
United States Supreme Court, various years.
Van Atta, John R.“‘A Lawless Rabble’: Henry Clay and the Cultural Politics of Squatters' Rights, 1832–1841.” Journal of the Early Republic 28, no. 3 (2008): 337–78.
van Ewijk, Casper, and van Leuvensteijn, Michiel, eds. Homeownership and the Labour Market in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Wallace, Anthony F. C.The Long Bitter Trail: Andrew Jackson and the Indians. New York: Hill and Wang, 1993.
Wallis, John Joseph.“Constitutions, Corporations, and Corruption: American States and Constitutional Change, 1842 to 1852.” The Journal of Economic History 65, no. 1 (2005): 211–56.
Wall Street Journal, 1 June 1984.
Washington Post, 31 May 1984.
Williamson, Mark B.“Land Reform in Japan.” Journal of Farm Economics 33, no. 2 (1951): 169–76.
Wolf, Michael Allan.The Zoning of America. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008.
Zuck, John M.“Kelo v. City of New London: Despite the Outcry, the Decision is Firmly Supported by Precedent—However, Eminent Domain Critics Still Have Gained Ground.” University of Memphis Law Review 38, no. 1 (2007): 187–230.