The Supreme Court of Hawaii has scheduled oral arguments in County of Hawaii v. Richards,No. 28882, the consolidated appeal from two eminent domain lawsuitsfiled by the County in 2000 and 2005. The issues in the case include:
…
How much growth is “too much,” and who gets to make that decision under Washington law? In Thurston County v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, No. 80115-1 (Aug. 14, 2008), the Washington Supreme Court issued an interesting — but highly technical — ruling on the issue that provides some insight into the issue. …
Three more amicus briefs have been filed in the U.S. Supreme Court case about the Navy’s use of mid-frequency active (MFA) sonar in training exercises off the California coast, Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., No. 07-1239.
…
An interesting Sixth Circuit case summarized on Law of the Land by Professor Patty Salkin, Jacob v. Township of West Bloomfield, 531 F.3d 385 (6th Cir. July 3, 2008), which held that zoning inspectors are required by the Fourth Amendment’s search and seizure clause must obtain a warrant if the zoning ordinance they are…
On August 14, we filed a brief amicus curiae in the case now pending in the U.S. Supreme Court about the Navy’s use of mid-frequency active (MFA) sonar in training exercises off the California coast, Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., No. 07-1239.
In that case, environmental groups challenged the use of…
So the federal government tells you that the device you are making is not a “machine gun” and you go ahead and start to manufacture them. Times change, though, and three years later “upon further review” (as they say in the NFL), the government tells you that the device is is an illegal “machine gun”…
There is still time to sign up to attend an upcoming seminar, Coastal Engineering and Land Use Issues, in Honolulu. It’s being held on Thursday, August 14, 2008, at at Hilton Waikiki Prince Kuhio Hotel. My colleagues and fellow law bloggers Mark Murakami and Jesse Souki are among the faculty. Topics on the agenda…
In a case a lot of folks have been following, a New Jersey appellate court yesterday struck down an attempt to declare properties “blighted.” Turns out these properties in a residential neighborhood which was proposed to be cleared for luxury condos were not in fact blighted, or at least the government had not proven that…
An interesting decision from the California Court of Appeals (First Appellate District) about a distinct branch of inverse condemnation law — government liability for flooding and erosion.
Generally, any physical invasion of property by or caused by the government, no matter how small, is compensable, either in eminent domain, inverse condemnation, or tort. See…
Here is what the ripeness requirements of Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) have brought us: a seemingly endless procedural game where property owners are forced to keep guessing which shell the pea is under, all the while paying their attorneys to litigate matters having nothing to do…
