 The Court ruled that a claimant does not waive his right to challenge a regulation as an uncompensated taking by purchasing property after the enactment of the regulation challenged.The Court held that the Rhode Island Supreme Court erred in holding that Petitioner did not have standing to sue because he acquired the property after the enactment of regulations.However, the Court also held that Palazzolo could not assert a takings claim based on the denial of all economic use of his property in light of undisputed evidence that the upland portion of the property was economically viable.