2007

In a case that illustrates the lengths a court will go to avoid dealing with the merits of a takings challenge, the Ninth Circuit in Equities Lifestyle Prop., Inc., v. County of San Luis Obispo (No. 05-55406) (Sep. 17, 2007), held that the plaintiff was both too early (not yet ripe under Williamson County)…

There’s an interesting discussion going on over at Professor Patty Salkin’s Law of the Land blog about a recent Ohio appeals court decision applying Lingle v. Chevron USA, 544 U.S. 528 (2005). 

Lingle didn’t get rid of the “substantially advance” test, it merelyrelocated it to due process, and reminded us that in thosecircumstances where…

To my colleagues at the LINC conference in D.C., thank you for the opportunity to present the topic.  Here are links to the cases discussed:

…

The question of “which came first, the Environmental Assessment exemption or the challenge?” is providing an interesting illustration of the metaphysical issue of what is the impact of a government act subsequently ruled to be illegal.

In denying the plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order, the Fifth Circuit court did not rule on…

Jay Fidell at ThinkTech Hawaii (Hawaii Public Radio KIPO-FM89.3) posts the podcasts of UH Law School dean and professor Avi Soifer’s appearance on the topic of “Pushing the constitutional envelope – how quickly, if at all, can it snap back.”  It’s not about land use and related topics, but worth listening nonetheless for anyone interested in the role of the courts in protecting constitutional rights. 

Sidebar: One of the more interesting law review articles I’ve read lately is Dean Soifer’s Courting Anarchy, 82 Boston U. L. Rev. 699 (2002), which criticized the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bush v. Goredecision, and analyzed the corrosive effect on judicial legitimacy whencourts make nakedly political decisions.  Speaking of that case, The WallStreet Journal’s law blog has this interesting tidbit: Continue Reading ▪ Podcast: UH Law School Dean on “Pushing the Constitutional Envelope” (mp3)

The Ninth Circuit panel summarizes its decision:

A Latin cross sits atop a prominent rock outcropping known as “Sunrise Rock” in the Mojave National Preserve (“Preserve”). Our court previously held that the presence of the cross in the Preserve—which consists of more than 90 percent federally-owned land, including the land where the cross is situated—violates…

Here is a collection of all the inversecondemnation.com posts on the Hawaii Superferry litigation:

Case documents —

Commentary and analysis —

…