To all those who attended today’s seminar, thank you. Here are the links to the cases I mentioned. From the morning session on Case Law Update:
- Wilkie – Government Gone Wild! – no comprehensive federal remedy for federal interference with property
- My Advertiser op-ed on Wilkie
- Crown Point – Ninth Circuit abandons Armendariz doctrine
- Cine SK8 – one way to prove a substantive due process case
- Post-Kelo claims of pretext:
- Franco – District of Columbia Court of Appeals – allegations of pretext cannot be summarily dismissed
- Goldstein v. Pataki – Second Circuit – government’s claim of public use trump claims of pretext – cert. petition filed March 31, 2008
- Brescia – shoreline setback and equitable estoppel – HAWSCT holds you gotta get your “official assurances” from the right party
- Private agreements and public process – development and settlement agreements not a substitute for zoning process
From the afternoon session on Appealing an Administrative Zoning Decision:
- Hawaii Home Infusion – venue in administrative declaratory actions under § 91-7
- CARD – can a § 91-8 declaratory action substitute for an appeal?
- Colony Surf – nonconforming uses and reliance on administrative procedures
- E & J Lounge – what is a “contested case?” See also Aha Hui Malama v. Kaniakapupu v. Land Use Comm’n (July 24, 2006)
- Rees v. Carlisle – private rights of action
- Silva v. City and County of Honolulu – the basis for rational basis equal protection arguments must be in the record
Questions? Want a copy of the vested rights/zoning estoppel law review article? Drop me an email.