context: Nevertheless, each inquiry "might be subsidiary to a question embracing both -- Was there a taking?" Id. Thus, plaintiffs' position that the WARA effected a taking in two different ways reflects their advancement of "separate arguments in support of a single claim," rather than separate claims.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.identifier: 82 Fed.Cl. 211, 211-13
citation_a.parenthetical: determining that the government effected both physical and regulatory takings of the plaintiffs' property
citation_a.sentence: Id. at 535, 112 S.Ct. 1522; see also Acceptance Ins. Cos., 583 F.3d at 854 (“A ‘taking’ may occur either by physical invasion or by regulation.” (emphasis added)); cf. Estate of Hage, 82 Fed.Cl. at 211-13 (determining that the government effected both physical and regulatory takings of the plaintiffs’ property).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 583 F.3d 854, 854
citation_b.parenthetical: "A 'taking' may occur either by physical invasion or by regulation." (emphasis added
citation_b.sentence: Id. at 535, 112 S.Ct. 1522; see also Acceptance Ins. Cos., 583 F.3d at 854 (“A ‘taking’ may occur either by physical invasion or by regulation.” (emphasis added)); cf. Estate of Hage, 82 Fed.Cl. at 211-13 (determining that the government effected both physical and regulatory takings of the plaintiffs’ property).