Currently at the annual conference on eminent domain law – as always, well worth attending.
In the morning’s session, Professor Kanner mentioned the recent decision in County of Hawaii v. C & J Coupe Family Limited Partnership, No. 28882 (Dec. 24, 2008), which has not yet been published in the official reporters. The slip
One of the bigger developments, at least in Hawaii law, came in the last week of the year. We’re talking about the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision in County of Hawaii v. C & J Coupe Family Limited Partnership, No. 28882 (Dec. 24, 2008) (and we’re not just hailing the case because we’re the attorneys
Following up on this post, where we pointed out several errors in a headline and subheadline in a Honolulu Star-Bulletin story on the Hawaii Supreme Court’s landmark eminent domain decision in County of Hawaii v. C & J Coupe Family Limited Partnership, No. 28882 (Dec. 24, 2008), the Star-Bulletin has posted corrections and
The Zoning and Planning Law Report (Thomson | West) has published my article about the post-Lingle developments in substantive due process in the Ninth Circuit. Download a pdf of the article here.
From the introduction:
Substantive due process asserted as a claim for relief has a whiff of danger about it. After all
Thanks to SCOTUSblog for posting the cert petition, filed on January 5, 2008, in Navajo Nation v. United States Forest Service, No. 08A368.
The petition seeks review of an en banc Ninth Circuit panel decision holding it was not a “substantial burden” on the religious exercises of Native American tribes for the Forest
2008 saw no blockbuster court decisions on shoreline law, just a continuation of existing trends.
Setbacks
Shoreline setback are a “no build” zone on private beachfront property, measured from a “setback line.” Hawaii state law establishes a minimum shoreline setback, and the four counties are allowed to establish their own (greater) setbackstandards. In 2008, Kauai
The Hawaii Supreme Court clarified when an agency hearing will be deemed to be a “contested case” in E & J Lounge Operating Co. v. Liquor Comm’n of the City & County of Honolulu,No. 27940 (July 29, 2008). The issue was whether, as the caption of the caseindicates, a public hearing before the Honolulu
We aren’t officially an “environmental law” blog, and when we do cover the issue, it is mostly on the periphery. However, in 2008, we hit a couple of significant issues that had some relevance to land use law.
First, in the U.S. Supreme Court’s first decision of the Term, Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council,
I usually try to not take too seriously the headlines attached to a newspaper story or op-ed. After all, an editor — and not the reporter or op-ed author — may have written the headline, and it may be designed to grab a reader’s attention or focus on a part of the story the editor
A round up of interesting and notable zoning decisions: