Here's one for all you civil procedure mavens.
The Florida District Court of Appeal concluded that the Board of Trustees, sued for inverse condemnation for beach renourishment (this case is somewhat related to our old friend the Stop the Beach Renourishment case, decided by the Supreme Court in 2010), waived their objections to improper venue. The court held that when the plaintiffs amended their complaint, they did not change the nature of their inverse condemnation claim, which thus "related back," and since the Board hadn't objected to venue originally, it could not do so now.
The court also concluded that the Board could be sued in the county where its headquarters are located, even though the taking occured in another county, and that it was a waivable issue, and not one of subject matter jurisdiction. Yes, condemnation actions are in rem and are to be litigated where the property is located, but inverse condemnation actions are not quite the same. These actions seek just compensation and not a change in title, so even though inverse condemnation claims are based on "in rem concepts," the court held, this is not a hard and fast rule of law that mandates that such claims be treated for venue purposes the same as condemnation actions.