Mark your calendars for next Thursday, November 5, 2015, at 4:30pm at the University of Hawaii Law School Moot Courtroom for the annual Gifford Lecture in Real Property, sponsored by our colleagues at Carlsmith Ball.
This year, the lecture is by Columbia Lawprof Thomas W. Merrill (also a recent Brigham-Kanner Property Rights prizewinner
In Dimare Fresh, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-5006 (Oct. 28, 2015), the Federal Circuit held that the FDA wasn’t liable for a taking when it issued an incorrect food safety warning that hurt the tomato market, because it was just a warning and didn’t come with coercive action like a quarantine or a
We’ve had the Kansas Supreme Court’s opinion in Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. Strong, No. 110573 (Aug. 28, 2015) in the hopper for a while, but never quite got around to posting it. Something else always seemed to take precedence, and it’s just one of those decisions that doesn’t really reach out
1. Don’t repeatedly refer to your private poll as an “election” and limit it to “voters” of only a certain race. Real “voters” who are excluded from your election .. I mean poll might get the wrong idea, like it’s an election or something.
2. Don’t use public money to fund said
The Mississippi Highway Commission wanted to build a road. That road was on wetlands, so it needed a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In order to convince the Corps to issue the permit, the Commission offered up 1,300 acres of land as wetlands mitigation. Problem was, these 1,300 acres didn’t belong to
We all know the old rule that “interest follows principal,” which means that when a deposit on account is private property, so is the interest which that deposit earns.
Not according to the Florida Court of Appeals, however. In a 2014 decision, that court held that interest earned on quick-take deposits was not
Following up on yesterday’s post, here’s another one about precondemnation offers.
In City of Rosenberg v. State of Texas, No. 14-15-00745-CV (Tex. App. Oct. 13, 2015),
In General Commercial Properties, Inc. v. Florida Dep’t of Transportation, No. 4D14-0699 (Fla. Dist. App. Oct. 14, 2015), the court held that a statute which requires the trial court to use the “first written offer” by the condemnor made prior to the initiation of the eminent domain case as the benchmark when it is
Here’s the amici brief we filed today in California Building Industry Ass’n v. City of San Jose, No. 15-330 (Oct. 16, 2015).
That’s the case in which the California Supreme Court upheld the city’s “affordable housing” requirement against a challenge which asserted that it was an exaction and thus should have been subject to
If you are an appellant, you know it isn’t going to be a good day when the opinion in your case starts out like this:
“What a long, strange trip it’s been.”1 And, it doesn’t seem to be over due to the continued meanderings of the cause before us and the arguments posed by