Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25

- Free Preparation Discussions

American Planning Association AICP Exam - Topic 2 Question 80 Discussion

Actual exam question for American Planning Association's AICP exam

Question #: 80
Topic #: 2

[All AICP Questions]

What case did Alfred Bettman argue?

ASouth Burlington County NAACP v Township of Mount Laurel

BFasano v Board of Co. Commissioners of Washington Co.

CGolden v Planning Board of the Town of Ramapo

DVillage of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: A

by Elouise at Jul 11, 2024, 10:29 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium AICP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Kiley

8 months ago

I thought he was involved in more than one case, though.

upvoted 0 times

...

Linn

9 months ago

Yup, definitely Mount Laurel. Big impact on zoning laws!

upvoted 0 times

...

Elbert

9 months ago

Wait, are you sure it wasn't the Ramapo case?

upvoted 0 times

...

Chantay

9 months ago

Totally agree, it was a landmark decision.

upvoted 0 times

...

Denise

9 months ago

He argued the Mount Laurel case!

upvoted 0 times

...

Bobbye

10 months ago

I’m pretty confident it’s the Mount Laurel case, but I might be mixing it up with something else I read.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carrol

10 months ago

I feel like I saw a practice question about Golden v Planning Board, but I can't recall if Bettman was part of it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ulysses

10 months ago

I remember studying the Village of Euclid case, but I don't think Bettman was involved in that one.

upvoted 0 times

...

Merilyn

10 months ago

I think Alfred Bettman argued in the South Burlington County case, but I'm not entirely sure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Christoper

10 months ago

I'm a little confused on this one. Was Bettman involved in the Mount Laurel decision? Or was that a different case? I'll have to double-check my understanding of these important land use precedents.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nakisha

10 months ago

Okay, I think I've got this. Wasn't Bettman the lawyer who argued the Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co. case? That was a landmark zoning decision, if I recall correctly.

upvoted 0 times

...

Deeanna

10 months ago

Hmm, this is a tricky one. I know Bettman was involved in some important land use and zoning cases, but I'm having trouble remembering the specifics. I'll have to carefully review my notes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Elmira

10 months ago

I'm pretty sure this is asking about a case that Alfred Bettman argued, so I'll need to think back to the cases we covered in class. Let me see...

upvoted 0 times

...

Terrilyn

10 months ago

I'm feeling pretty confident about this one. Bettman argued the Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co. case, which established the constitutionality of comprehensive zoning. That's a key case we covered in this unit, so I'm going with that.

upvoted 0 times

...

Melissa

10 months ago

I'm pretty sure the label change only affects the child table, but I want to double-check that.

upvoted 0 times

...

Regenia

11 months ago

I'm a bit confused on this one. The requirement to protect the backend server without removing the header has me stumped. I'll need to review the rewrite action types more closely to figure out the best approach.

upvoted 0 times

...

Erick

1 year ago

Wait, isn't Alfred Bettman the guy who invented the traffic light? *laughs* Just kidding, but seriously, I'm pretty sure it's Fasano v Board of Co. Commissioners of Washington Co. That was a big zoning case, right? *shrugs* Guess we'll see if I'm right on this one.

upvoted 0 times

Sylvie

1 year ago

Oh, really? I thought it was Fasano v Board of Co. Commissioners of Washington Co. Interesting.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tenesha

1 year ago

No, it was actually Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ryann

1 year ago

Yeah, Alfred Bettman argued in Fasano v Board of Co. Commissioners of Washington Co.

upvoted 0 times

...

...

Keneth

1 year ago

Okay, let's see... Alfred Bettman, city planning... *snaps fingers* Got it! It's gotta be South Burlington County NAACP v Township of Mount Laurel. He was a big advocate for fair housing, if I remember correctly. *laughs* Man, I hope this isn't one of those 'name the case where the defendant won' kind of deals.

upvoted 0 times

Shaquana

1 year ago

That's correct! He was definitely a key figure in advocating for fair housing.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marci

1 year ago

Yeah, you're right! Alfred Bettman argued in South Burlington County NAACP v Township of Mount Laurel.

upvoted 0 times

...

...

Germaine

1 year ago

Hold up, wasn't Alfred Bettman the guy who literally wrote the book on city planning? If that's the case, my money's on Golden v Planning Board of the Town of Ramapo. That's gotta be it, right? *chuckles* Unless this is some kind of trick question...

upvoted 0 times

...

Gertude

1 year ago

Hmm, I'm not sure. Let's look it up to be sure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Della

1 year ago

Hmm, Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co. sounds familiar, but I feel like I've heard the name Alfred Bettman before. Is that the one where he argued for more inclusive housing policies? Better double-check that one.

upvoted 0 times

...

Apolonia

1 year ago

I believe it was actually Fasano v Board of Co. Commissioners of Washington Co.

upvoted 0 times

...

Wendell

1 year ago

I'm pretty sure it was Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co. That landmark case established the legality of zoning laws, which is definitely something an urban planning exam would cover.

upvoted 0 times

Ashton

1 year ago

The Supreme Court upheld the zoning laws in that case.

upvoted 0 times

...

Angelo

1 year ago

Do you remember what the outcome of the case was?

upvoted 0 times

...

Valda

1 year ago

Yes, you're right. That case was about zoning laws.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dorsey

1 year ago

I think it was Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co.

upvoted 0 times

...

...

Gertude

1 year ago

I think Alfred Bettman argued in South Burlington County NAACP v Township of Mount Laurel.

upvoted 0 times

...