Thanks to the Federal Bar Association (Northern District of California Chapter), today I had the pleasure of attending a panel discussion of the significant cases from the Supreme Court’s recently ended Term.
The panelists discussed “Guns, Free Speech, Criminal Justice, Campaign Finance, Separation of Powers … and ‘Inside Baseball’ Views of the Court
Here’s a case from the North Carolina Court of Appeals that is similar to last week’s decision by the Kansas Supreme Court, in that it involves an inverse condemnation claim resolved by the burdens on the parties in the course of a summary judgment motion.
The public utility decided to install a sewer line
So let’s say you want to hold fundraisers for political bigshots in your home. When the crowd you are hobnobbing with includes Bill Clinton, you might expect the Secret Service to come along, and you might expect that your local constabulary is asked to pitch in to help the T-Men with security, and traffic and
In Kauai Springs struggling, The Garden Island (the Kauai daily newspaper) writes about
The Kauai Planning Commission (Planning Commission) asks this Court to validate a remarkable theory: that in the course of reviewing whether Kauai Springs, Inc. (Kauai Springs) was entitled to three simple zoning permits for its agriculturally-zoned land, the public trust doctrine
I recently picked up a copy of Property Rights – Eminent Domain and Regulatory Takings Re-Examined (Bruce L. Benson, ed., Independent Institute 2010), available on-line here.
At 299 pages and with 13 entries, I haven’t had a chance to read the whole thing yet. But after an initial skim, a few of the chapters
In Hines v. California Coastal Commission, No. A125254 (decided June 17, 2010, ordered published July 13, 2010), the California Court of Appeal (First District) held that the California Coastal Commission properly refused to hear the appeal of a neighbor who opposed the grant of a use permit because the appeal did not present a
In 1978, the people of Hawaii amended the state constitution to recognize “the right to a clean and healthful environment,” and expressly enabled lawsuits by private parties to enforce “laws relating to environmental quality” —
Each person has the right toa clean and healthful environment, as defined by laws relating to environmentalquality, including control of
More on the “judicial takings” case, Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dep’t of Environmental Protection, No. 08-11 (June 17, 2010).
Remember that at the ABA Annual Meeting next month in San Francisco, the Section of State and Local Government Law is co-sponsoring a panel discussion of the case. I’ll be moderating, and
We have no idea what these cases might be about, or whether there is any substance behind the property owners’ objections, but these are headlines no condemnor could possibly like:
Here at inversecondemnation.com we also cover eminent domain, regulatory takings, land use, and environmental issues. We even cover election law when it strikes our fancy.
But here’s one that’s in our core competency: in Frick v. City of Salina, No. 101,355 (July 9, 2010) the Kansas Supreme Court held that property