In 1999, without asking the owner’s permission, the federal government constructed a 35,000 square foot “borrow pit” on a parcel in a remote corner of Texas. The owner did not learn about the government’s activities until 2004, when a migrant worker who had crossed the property to access the Rio Grande told him about it.
2009
Hawaii Superferry II: Rooting Out Pretext In Legislative Actions
“Unlike Bulgo, in this case there is no evidence in the record that any company, other than Superferry, met the definition provided by section 2 when Act 2 was enacted.”
Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Transportation, No. 29035 slip op. at 36 (March 16, 2009) (emphasis added)
If you take away…
Superferry Part II
Act 2’s Achilles Heel: Short Time Frame
The court also found it significant that Act 2 granted”large capacity ferry vessel companies” benefits for only a limitedamount of time:
In contrast, the Bulgo court considered anAct that was unlimited in duration. As such, it was possible thatfuture circumstances would require another county to exercise…
Bulgo
The court distinguished the lone case in which itinterpreted the term “general law” in a challenge to a statute passed by the statelegislature to allow Maui County to hold a special election after acouncilmember died between his election and taking office. Bulgo v. County of Maui,430 P.2d 321 (Haw. 1967). The statute in that…
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
In Hauselt v. County of Butte, No. C054927 (Mar. 23, 2009), the California Court of Appeal held
The property owner asserted the County inversely condemned its property by implementing a drainage plan which resulted in the land being flooded more often than usual, and that the County denied his proposal to develop the property.
More On Pretext In Eminent Domain
Following up on this story, West Hawaii Today reports “Attorneys argue against Supreme Court ruling on bypass,” about whether a second attempt to condemn property ostensibly for a road ispretextual when the court determined the first attempt was unconstitutional and nothing changed:
Attorneys for the Richards family and theCoupe Trust, in documents…
James Ely: Report Card On Post-Kelo Eminent Domain Reforms
Professor James Ely (who among other things, is the author of The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights) writes “A Report Card on Post-Kelo Eminent Domain Reforms” at the Oxford University Press blog. He notes the “decidedly mixed” legislative reactions to Kelo, and how many apparent…
New Cert Petition – Dolan Proportionality And Individualized Determination Applies To In-Lieu Fees
A cert petition has been filed seeking review of Joy Builders, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown, 11 N.Y.3d 863 (2008). That decision was summarized by Professor Patty Salkin on the Law of the Land blog here. The New York Court of Appeals refused to hear the case, ordering “Appeal dismissed without costs, by…
Cert Denied In Amerisource (Taking Of Property As Evidence)
The U.S. Supreme Court today issued an order denying review in AmeriSource Corp. v. United States, No. 08-497 (cert. petition filed Oct. 15, 2008), the case which asked “[w]hether it is a taking compensable under the Fifth Amendment for the Government to seize (and not return) an innocent third party’s propertyfor use as evidence in…
Determining Eminent Domain Pretext In Serial Takings
As reported in this story from West Hawaii Today, a Hawaii trial court is considering whether a second attempt to condemn property ostensibly for a road is pretextual when it determined the first attempt was unconstitutional. Disclosure: we represent the property owner in this case.
“Classic” Uses Not Immune
In County of Hawaii v. C&J…
