Here’s the latest development in the reconsideration process in the Turtle Bay/Kuilima EIS case, Unite Here! Local 5 v. City and County of Honolulu, No. 28602 (Apr. 8, 2010).
As we noted earlier, Kuilima Resort Company filed a motion asking the Hawaii Supreme Court to reconsider or clarify its opinion in the case.
According to the Daily Reporter (Wisconsin), that is. If it’s on the internet, it must be true, right?
Activists want U.S. Supreme Court to rule on eminent domain case summarizes the background in City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States v. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Milwaukee…
Appellate courts issue opinions and orders to decide cases. The opinions and orders in many cases get “published,” meaning that they end up in the bound reporters (the U.S., Federal, Federal Supplement, the official state reports, and in West’s Regional Reports, for example) and become precedential and set forth a rule of law governing future…
A couple of days ago, we posted “Final Briefs In Hawaii Beach Takings Case: Is ‘Future’ Accretion A Present Property Interest?” with what we thought was a complete set of the merits and amicus briefs filed in Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State of Hawaii, No. 28175 (cert. application filed Apr.
The first line of this opinion issued today by the Georgia Supreme Court got us all excited:
The trial court dismissed this condemnation case for lack of prosecution pursuant to OCGA § 9-2-60 (b).
Windsor f/k/a Bank v. City of Atlanta, No. S10A0102 (May 17, 2010). Was it a case where a condemnor sat…
here
Texas v. Hearts Bluff Game Ranch, Inc., No. 03-09-00598-DV (May 13, 2010),
Here
Carl Ronnie Daricek Living Trust v. Hancock County, No. 2009-IA-01515-SCT (May 13, 2010).
Here are the latest filings in Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State of Hawaii, No. 28175 (cert. application filed Apr. 22, 2010). In that case, the property owners are asking the Hawaii Supreme Court to review the decision of the Intermediate Court of Appeals in Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State of …
On June 1, 2010, starting at 2:00 p.m. ET, the New York Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in Kaur v. New York State Urban Development Corp. In that case, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (First Department) struck down the attempted taking of land north of Columbia University in New York…
After Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), many state and local governments adopted measures designed to limit exercises of the power of eminent domain. Some jurisdictions went for substantive limits. For example, Nebraska adopted a statute prohibiting takings that are “primarily” for economic development. Other jurisdictions took the procedural route…
