This probably isn’t the phrasing you should use if you are trying to convince others that you are not a “politically connected developer” who got the government to exercise eminent domain on your behalf.
“Atlantic Yards project was not properly presented,” complains Charles Ratner, the president of Forest City Enterprises in this letter to the
No doubt about it, the biggest Hawaii-centric land use related story this year was the continuing saga of the Hawaii Superferry. The case resulted in above-the-fold headlines, blogs devoted to the issue, and at least two trips to the Hawaii Supreme Court. We even live blogged the oral arguments. A summary of the case is
Next Tuesday (January 12, 2010) from 1-2pm Eastern Time, I’ll be speaking at a teleconference on land use exactions for members of the International Municipal Lawyers Association. I’ll be the guest of nationally-renown land use law experts Professor Dan Mandelker and attorney Dwight Merriam.
More information here.
The Hawaii Judiciary is now on Twitter. It looks like it will cover opinions from the Supreme Court and Intermediate Court of Appeals, as well as other judiciary news.
Check it out here.
If you don’t know what Twitter is, never mind (but you really should come join the conversation). In addition to the
Most of the buzz these days about eminent domain is about the “public use” side of the equation — whether a condemor can take property, and the legitimacy of its professed reasons for doing so. Today, however, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering the other side, which makes up a vast majority of eminent domain
The Minnesota Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in Eagan Economic Development Authority v. U-Haul Company of Minnesota. The case asks from where a redevelopment authority derives its eminent domain power. We digested the court of appeals’ decision here.
Update: a report on the argument is posted here.
Here’s the summary of
This post deals with the practical impacts of the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State of Hawaii,No. 28175 (Dec. 30, 2009). [Disclosure: we filed an amicus brief supporting the property owners,available here.]
First, some background for those who have not been following our recent
Can the legislature adopt a law mandating that from here forward, upon an owner’s death, all of her property escheats to the State? Yes, according to the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals. Because the property is not “vested” in future heirs and “may never materialize,” the State is free to take it.
That’s the basic