In United States v. 4.85 Acres of Land, No. 07-35310 (Sep. 29, 2008), the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the trial court should not have refused to admit evidence of sales at properties nearby the property taken, even though the sales occurred after the taking.
The federal government condemned…
Here are the filed briefs in County of Hawaii v. Richards,No.28882, the consolidated appeal from two eminent domain lawsuitsfiled by the County in 2000 and 2005. The filed briefs are here:
The issues in the case include:
…
The State of Hawaii has filed its Brief in Opposition in UFO Chuting of Hawaii, Inc. v. Thelen, No. 07-1427 (petition for cert. filed May 12, 2008). The petition seeks review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in UFO Chuting of Hawaii, Inc. v Smith, 508 F.3d 1189 (9th Cir. 2007), a case I…
Monday is the first day of the U.S. Supreme Court’s new term, and it will decide whether to review a slew of cases, including the “ceded lands” case, Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, No. 07-1372 (cert. petition filed Apr. 29, 2008). The State of Hawaii seeks U.S. Supreme Court review of the decision…
To those who attended the workshop at the University of Hawaii law school, Hawaii State Historic Preservation Laws: Reclaiming the Past, Shaping the Future, thank you. Here are links to the cases I mentioned in my presentation.
…
Well, not exactly new (its been on line for a couple of months, but I only discovered it recently). With posts by some of the more stellar practitioners of the fine art of eminent domain defense. The Eminent Domain Law Blog.
A very important decision today from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In Casitas Municipal Water District v. United States, No. 2007-5153 (Sep. 25, 2008), the court held that contractual water rights were taken when the federal government required the landowner to contruct a fish ladder and divert water in order…
“This case presents an issue of first impression in this Circuit — whether a legislative, generally applicable development condition that does not require the owner to relinquish rights in the real property, as opposed to an adjudicative land-use exaction, should be reviewed pursuant to the ad hoc standards of Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City…
Title says it all. Canales v. Artiga, No. 28908 (Sep. 19, 2008) (per curiam).
The California Court of Appeals, First District (San Francisco and other Northern California counties) in Center for Biological Diversity, Inc. v. FPL Group, Inc., No. A116362 (Sep. 18, 2008) held that the “public trust” is enforceable by the public against the government, and that wildlife is subject to the trust.
The plaintiffs brought suit…
