Here are the cases which I spoke about this morning at the 2015 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation conference:
- Brandt: Supreme Court benchslap on Rails-to-Trails
- Utah: You might have a public use problem if your only reason for taking excess property is that you wanted to avoid litigating severance damages
- Fourth Circuit: the Uniform Relocation Act is like the Pirate’s Code: more like “guidelines” than actual rules
- More from the Fourth Circuit: Govt not necessarily off the hook for EAJA fees because it later upped its unreasonable pretrial offer
- Plaintiff: “Alliance for Property Rights and Fiscal Responsibility.” Defendant: the City of Idaho Falls, Idaho. Court: Ninth Circuit. Any guesses who won?
- Pipeline through Kentucky is not a pipeline to Kentucky. If the Kentucky public doesn’t benefit, maybe it’s not for public use
Here is our annual “proof of life” photo, the view from the dais. Proof that despite the conference being held in beautiful San Francisco with its many distractions, we are all here (all 150+ of us) getting our eminent domain groove on.
Here are links to the cases and issues to watch:
- Horne v. USDA: California Raisins part II – the “world’s most outdated law crashes headlong into takings (SCOTUS granted cert, merits briefing underway)
- Texas v. Clear Channel: is a billboard really “moveable” property? (case submitted to the Texas Supreme Court, decision pending)
- Property Reserve: pushing California’s entry statutes too far (the merits briefing in the California Supreme Court has not been completed, but we will post the briefs filed so far in a separate post)
- Oregon: is common law highway access a property right, but one that’s essentially worthless? (discretionary review pending in the Oregon Supreme Court)
- Hillcrest v. Pasco County: must a property owner challenge an illegal exaction for facial due process invalidity before he has standing to bring an as-applied challenge? (cert petition pending at SCOTUS)
One last photo: sitting on the dock of the Bay:
