barred without respect to whether it is meritorious. Legislatures enact statutes of limitations tailoring the time period to what is thought appropriate to the nature of the cause of action. See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) (two years for claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act); 26 U.S.C. § 6511 (for tax refund suits, three years from time tax return was filed or two years from time tax was paid, whichever expires later); 15 U.S.C. § 15b (four years for private antitrust suits under the Clayton Act). Even without a specific statutory bar to call into play, courts will impose a parallel bar — under the rubric of lach-es — in eases in which the plaintiff ha F.3d 1560 (Fed.Cir.1994) (remanding for determination of partial taking); Hen-dler v. United States, 952 F.2d 1364 (Fed. Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). In others, the Government is held not to be
holding that inverse condemnation claim challenging as a regulatory taking the states placement of a guard rail that blocked former access was not ripe for adjudication where owners had failed to apply for permit for alternative approach and it therefore was not possible to assess whether a taking had occurred as a result of a deprivation of all reasonable access holding medical monitoring claim was merely component of damages holding that government placement of groundwater monitoring wells was a taking holding that the federal government was liable for a taking of property where city of burlington acted under federal authority holding that a cause of action for an unconstitutional taking accrues at the time the taking occurs