According to this story (“Eminent domain panel values Flight 93 crash site at $1.5 million“), a three-person panel of commissioners appointed by the U.S. District Court has settled on the amount of compensation owed the landowner for the taking of the site in middle Pennsylvania where United 93 crashed on September 11, 2001.
December 2013
Hawaii Trial Court: Seawall No One Wants Belongs To State
Usually, in disputes about who owns oceanfront property (in Waikiki, the really nice part of Waikiki, down on the Diamond Head side), each party claims ownership. Beachfront property, after all, is pretty valuable.
But sometimes, it can be a liability.
So maybe “hot potato” is more accurate in this case, since it involves an old…
Minn S Ct Defines The Same “Community” In Business Relocation Statute Doesn’t Necessarily Mean A Place Where Business Can Survive
New FOIA Complaint Seeks Information About Underwater Mortgage Eminent Domain Issue
The latest front has opened in the ongoing (and spreading) issue about Mortgage Resolution Partners’ efforts to convince municipalities to use their powers of eminent domain to take underwater mortgages.
Here’s the Complaint, filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Nothern District of California, which seeks public disclosure by the Federal Housing…
Minn S Ct: Zoning Requirement To Obtain CUP Does Not Affect Nonconforming Use Owner’s Property Rights
A key win for property rights today in the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision in White v. City of Elk River, No. A12-0681 (Dec. 4, 2013). In that case, the court concluded that a municipality could not revoke a campground’s nonconforming use as penalty for alleged violations of the conditions of the conditional use permit.
Fed Cir: On Remand From SCOTUS, Arkansas Game Flood Is A Taking
Just in: the Federal Circuit today issued an opinion in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 2009-5121 (Dec. 3, 2013), concluding that the government must pay just compensation for a taking, because it caused the Commission’s land to be flooded.
This is the case that was up before the U.S. Supreme…
Govt’s BIO In Mehaffy: Preexisting Regulations Wipe Out Penn Central’s Reasonable Expectations
Here’s the government’s Brief in Opposition in Mehaffy v. United States, No. 12-1416 (cert. petition filed June 3, 2013.
In that case, the Federal Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, held that Mehaffy failed the Penn Central ad hoc takings test solely because he purchased the property alleged to have been taken after the …


