Following up on our earlier post about anti-eminent domain signs are the below, courtesy Dwight Merriam, of the Kelo neighborhood in New London, Connecticut, during the time of the strife. See also the book Dwight edited for the ABA about the case.
The signs have long since been removed. Along with the properties themselves
In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit concluded that Norfolk, Virginia’s sign ordinance did not violate the First Amendment, when it was applied to bar the anti-eminent domain banner shown above.
Central Radio Co. Inc. v. City of Norfolk, No. 13-1996 (4th Cir. Jan. 13, 2015), arose from
Here’s the final program and faculty list for the 2015 Hawaii Land Use Conference, coming up Thursday and Friday, January 15-16, 2015, in downtown Honolulu.
This is the bi-annual gathering of Hawaii’s land use mavens, and this year’s program has two very special presenters. Storied lawprof Richard Epstein (perhaps more than a “mere mortal”
On Maui today to argue an eminent domain case, so haven’t had a chance to post up a new opinion. But in our down time between hearings and flights, we were able to do some reading of our colleagues’ stimulating blog posts. Check ’em out:
Ralph v. State of Washington Dep’t of Natural Resources, No. 88115-4 (Dec. 31, 2014), is a Washington-specific case because it involves the Washington Supreme Court’s view of a state statute governing where lawsuits “for any injuries to real property” “shall be commenced.” But since one of the claims brought by the plaintiff for flooding he
January 10, 2015: A correction, with edits as noted below.
An astute reader has pointed out that there were actually three cases regarding the Haleakala telescope (two of them remain unresolved), and that we got them mixed up in our post.
The first, resolved by the Hawaii Supreme Court in this opinion, was whether
We recently posted a summary of the TransCanada pipeline issue (currently splashed across the front pages nationally) by our Owners’ Counsel of America colleague William Blake, a partner in the Lincoln office of Nebraska law firm Baylor Evnen.
Today, in a highly anticipated decision (Thompson v. Heineman, No. S14-158 (Jan. 9, 2015)
Commonwealth v. Allen, No. J-68-2014 (Dec. 29, 2014), the latest from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, is not an eminent domain or an inverse condemnation case, but we’re posting it here because the dissenting opinions contain some neat language about the importance of property rights.
The case involved a guy who beat a criminal charge
Here’s the property owners’ Reply Brief in Ramsey v. Commissioner of Highways, a case currently pending before the Virginia Supreme Court.
This is the case about Virginia’s statutory requirements in eminent domain cases. As
a prerequisite to a court exercising jurisdiction over a condemnation complaint, a state condemning agency must as an initial step
Congratulations to friend and colleague Thor Hearne for his being named as one the Top 50 Litigation Trailblazers by the National Law Journal. Or should we say Rails-to-Trails-Blazer?
Readers of the blog are familiar with his guest posts (see also this one), our coverage of his work, and his own Federal