Our Cincinnati colleague Matt Fellerhoff has posted his thoughts on an interesting case from the Ohio Supreme Court, Clifton v. Village of Blanchester, No. CA2009-07-009 (Mar. 1, 2012). The case involves whether an owner whose property is located outside village limits can bring a takings case against the village. The Ohio Supreme Court held
2012
The Bizarre Follow Up To New Jersey’s “Bizarre Condemnation”
Last we checked in, the case we’ve been referring to as the “bizarre condemnation” (Klumpp v. Borough of Avalon) was decided by the unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court in favor of the property owners, and remanded to the trial court for a determination of the compensation owed to the property owners…
Federal Court Lawsuit: Hawaii Legislative Reapportionment Cannot Exclude Military, Military Families
It may be Good Friday (an official State Holiday in Hawaii), but the federal courts are open, and today, on behalf of six plaintiffs including several veterans, we filed a lawsuit challenging under the Equal Protection Clause the State of Hawaii’s practice of excluding military personnel, their families, and university students who pay nonresident…
9th Circuit On The Constitutionality Of Hawaii’s Good Friday Holiday: Go Shopping Or Something
Today is Good Friday, an official holiday in the State of Hawaii, so we’re reposting our annual recounting of how it came to be that the State celebrates the date of the crucifixion. Turns out that it doesn’t really, it’s just coincidence that the “spring holiday” occurs on the same day. Or so says…
Petitioner’s Reply Brief In Manhattan Eminent Domain Case: Time To Reinvigorate The Just Compensation Clause
Here’s the final cert stage brief (Petitioner’s Reply) in River Center LLC v. Dormitory Auth. of the State of New York, No. 11-922 (cert. petition filed Jan. 23, 2012), the case in which a Manhattan property owner and developer is challenging the compensation awarded by New York courts for a taking near…
Loretto Redux: NY Court Of Appeals Revisits An Old Friend
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following, a tale from New York that reminds us of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (1982). Every takings lawyer worth his or her salt knows that Loretto stands for the proposition that a regulation allowing a…
Supreme Court To Review Another Takings Case: Is Temporary Flooding Causing Permanent Damage A Taking?
Fire up your SCOTUS monitors and amicus pens: the Supreme Court has granted cert in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012), a case from the Federal Circuit that we’ve been watching.
In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit held that flooding caused by…
Texas (Again) Affirms Property Rights: No “Rolling Easement” On Beaches
Today, the Texas Supreme Court issued opinions in Severance v. Patterson, No. 09-0387, the case before the court on certified questions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit asked whether Texas recognizes a “rolling” beachfront access easement (a public easement on littoral property that moves with naturally caused…
Cal App: Sale To Private Redeveloper Under Threat Of Condemnation Is A “Change Of Ownership” Under Prop 13
Here’s one for your California readers. You know Proposition 13, the provision in the California Constitution that limits property tax increases, and allows reassessment of value only upon a change of ownership, and you either love it or hate it: to some it insulates property owners from being forced out of their homes by…
BIO In SCOTUS Just Compensation Case
Here’s the BIO in in River Center LLC v. Dormitory Auth. of the State of New York, No. 11-922 (cert. petition filed Jan. 23, 2012), the case in which a Manhattan property owner and developer is challenging the compensation awarded by New York courts for a taking near Lincoln Center.
The Appellate Division denied…
