2013

Cornell lawprof Robert Hockett, the guy who by all accounts thought up of the idea of using eminent domain to take “blighted” (underwater, but mostly performing) mortgages, was interviewed on “Air Occupy” about the scheme yesterday. Here’s the podcast (we originally embedded the podcast below, but the darn thing was set to play automatically

The Honolulu City Council has proposed a charter amendment that asks the voters to approve eliminating the Mayor’s current veto power over the Council’s eminent domain resolutions.

The Resolution doesn’t directly say that, of course, but what it does command is that after the Council adopts a resolution to take property, the city administration must

Here’s the State’s Reply Brief supporting its application for cert and responding to the landowner’s BIO in the land court registration case, In re Campbell. The brief argues that “[t]his is no minor land dispute,” and “that the State is very concerned about the ICA Opinion.”

What’s so important about the State’s claimed reservation

text

In this eminent-domain case, a jury determined that the City of Laredo’s condemnation was
not for an authorized public use and awarded attorney’s fees and expenses to the property owner
under Texas Property Code § 21.019(c).  This fee-shifting statute authorizes the trial court to “make
an allowance to the property owner for reasonable and

Civil pro wonks, get ready: we all know that under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, states are required to give the judgments of another state the same respect that those judgments would receive in the courts of the other state. That principle remains the same whether the judgment is issued by a state

Here’s the Response to Application for Writ of Certiorari by the State of Hawaii, which opposes the State’s cert app asking the Hawaii Supreme Court to review for grave error the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ opinion in In re Trustees Under the Will of the Estate of James Campbell, No. 30006 (June 13

Rent control cases rarely thrill us. They’s often long, the ordinances and rules being challenged are usuallylabyrinthian, and from our point of view, the results are mostly unsatisfying. 

The California Court of Appeal’s recent opinion in Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson, No. B227092 (Oct. 21, 2013) doesn’t deviate from that pattern: