2011

In case you were not paying attention on this fine Thursday, here comes the Federal Circuit’s opinion in Mildenberger v. United States, No. 2010-5084 (June 30, 2011). It’s an interesting opinion because it deals with the mildly metaphysical question of when the six year statute of limitations for inverse condemnation claims against the federal…

It’s a well-worn refrain, heard often in the environmental context: “The property owner wouldn’t be in this fix if she just ___________.” Fill in the blank with “commissioned an Environmental Assessment” — or “Environmental Impact Statement,” or “applied for a development permit,” or similar.

At first blush, it’s an appealing argument — “Just follow the…

That’s not the most elegant of headlines, but to those of you interested in the valuation of equipment and machinery in eminent domain cases, you’ll like this post.

[Update: more from our Michigal Owner’s Counsel colleague Alan Ackerman at the National Eminent Domain Blog, and from the Rocky Mountain Appellate Blog.]

Thanks…

Yesterday, we reported on the South Carolina Supreme Court’s opinion in Brown v. Howard, No. 26991 (S.C. June 21, 2011), holding that “the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is implicated when an attorney is appointed by the court to represent an indigent litigant. In such circumstances, the attorney’s …

We hold today that the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is implicated when an attorney is appointed by the court to represent an indigent litigant. In such circumstances, the attorney’s services constitute property entitling the attorney to just compensation.

Brown v. Howard, No. 26991 (S.C. June 21, 2011).*…

We predicted the Supreme Court wasn’t finished with judicial takings or judicial takings-like issues after its decision (or, more accurately, non-decision) in Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Fla. Dep’t of Envt’l Protection, 130 S. Ct. 2592 (2010). It looks like we might have more grist for the mill, because today, the Court agreed to…

“Hard cases make bad law” goes the cliché.* But in the case of the Williamson County ripeness requirement in federal takings cases, the bad law is an entirely self-inflicted wound and cannot be blamed on lousy facts or hard cases. Others have done a much better job of deconstructing Williamson County‘s faulty history…

If you hear that property owners should not worry too much when their homes, land, or businesses are targeted for eminent domain because the government has their best interest in mind and will treat them fairly, pay attention to this case. 

Most understand government’s power to take property by eminent domain. (Note: we don’t like…

The technical legal question before the Court in Nevada Comm’n on Ethics v. Carrigan, No. 10-568 (June 13, 2011) was whether legislative voting by an elected official was “speech” and if so, whether the First Amendment allowed him to vote for a casino development proposal in which his campaign manager and personal friend was…

A new case worth watching has been filed in Hawaii state court (Third Circuit, the Big Island) that involves allegations of vested rights and estoppel, Nollan/Dolan exactions, state and federal due process and takings, inverse condemnation, and equal protection.The

See below, the Complaint in Bridge Aina Le’a v. State of Hawaii Land Use…