In “Beach ownership is still in question,” the Honolulu Star-Bulletin reports on Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State of Hawaii, No. 28175, the appeal currently pending in the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals about whether Hawaii’s “Act 73” effected a taking of property. Thanks to Charley Foster at Planet Kauai for
Unfrozen Caveman Judges “Frightened And Confused” By Blight
Remember Phil Hartman’s classic Saturday Night Live routine, “Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer” —
One hundred thousand years ago, a caveman was out hunting on the frozenwastes when he slipped and fell into a crevasse. In 1988, he wasdiscovered by some scientists and thawed out. He then went to lawschool and became… Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer.
Media And Commentary Links On NYCA’s Atlantic Yards Decision
While we’re formulating our thoughts on the NY Court of Appeals’ decision in Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp., No. 178 (Nov. 24, 2009), here are media reports and others’ thoughts on the case:
- The blog at the epicenter of the case, the Atlantic Yards Report has a series of posts with
New York Court Of Appeals: Agency Can Blight The Baby With The Bathwater With No Judicial Oversight
The New York Court of Appeals issued its opinion in the appeal regarding the Atlantic Yards redevelopment project, Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp., No. 178 (Nov. 24, 2009). This case was a challenge to the taking under the New York Constitution.
While we have not yet fully digested the 66 pages
New York Court Of Appeals: Government Liable For Attorney’s Fees For First Phase Of An Unsuccessful Taking
Thanks to the New York Zoning and Municipal Law Blog for pointing out last week’s decision by the New York Court of Appeals in Hargett v. Town of Ticonderoga, 2009 NY Slip Op 08478 (Nov. 19, 2009).
Under New York’s eminent domain law, the condemning authority is liable to the property owner for attorney’s
Thursday’s Links
Things we were reviewing today:
- Check out the just-launched Hawaii Civil Procedure blog. It’s a welcome addition to the blogroll for Hawaii civil practitioners.
- My colleague Mark Murakami has set up a resource page for all things about the McDonald v. City of Chicago case. That’s the appeal currently being considered by the Supreme
Links From ABA Condemnation Committee Conference Call (11/18/2009)
Another very interesting conference call today, focusing on theupcoming arguments in the Stop the Beach Renourishment case, the New York Court of Appeals’ decision in Aspen Creek, and the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision to review Klumpp v. Borough of Avalon. Here arethe links to some of the cases and other topics discussed
Programming Note: Condemnation Committee Conference Call 11/18/2009, 2 pm EST
Just a reminder: tomorrow (Wednesday, November 18, 2009), from 2:00 – 3:00 p.m.(Eastern Standard Time), we will be holding the next “recentdevelopments” conference call for members of the Condemnation Law Committee(ABA Section of State & Local Government Law). It’s free, but openonly to Section members and guests.
Members should have already received an e-mail
Reply Brief: Must A Property Owner Seek A Change In The Law In Order To Ripen A Takings Claim?
Here’s the Reply Brief filed last month by the property owner in Leone v. County of Maui, No.29696,an appeal in the HawaiiIntermediate Court of Appeals which is considering, among other issues,the question of when a regulatory takings claim is ripe for reviewunder Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City