This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear what might have been a major property rights case, California Building Industry Ass’n v. City of San Jose, No. 15-330 (cert. petition filed Oct. 16, 2015).
In that case, the California Supreme Court upheld the city’s “affordable housing” requirement against a challenge which asserted that
This morning, the Supreme Court agreed to hear another important property rights case, California Building Industry Ass’n v. City of San Jose, No. 15-330 (cert. petition filed Oct. 16, 2015).
In that case, the California Supreme Court upheld the city’s “affordable housing” requirement against a challenge which asserted that it was an exaction and
A longer one from the California Court of Appeal, but unfortunately, we don’t have the time to digest it in detail. But you really should read Pacific Shores Property Onwers Ass’n v. Dep’t of Fish and Wildlife, No. C070301 (Jan. 20, 2016), in which the court upheld a ruling that the Department of Fish
Here’s the amicus brief we filed today in support of the Petitioner/property owner in Resource Investments, Inc. v. United States, No. 16-802. That’s the case in which the property owner is claiming that the delay in issuing Clean Water Act permits was so extraordinary, it was a temporary taking. Ultimately, the Federal Circuit
Good news, takings fans. The U.S. Supreme Court today granted cert, and will review Murr v. Wisconsin, the case in which the Wisconsin Court of Appeals held that two separate parcels owned by the same family must be treated as a single unit for purposes of determining whether there has been a taking.
When we first read the caption in Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer Dist. v. City of Bellefontaine Neighbors, No. SC94831 (Jan. 12, 2016), we admit to a bit of confusion because this is an inverse condemnation case, and it appeared that a public entity was suing one of those activist groups, “The Bellefontaine Neighbors.”
After the usual preliminaries — certification of a 253-member class, subclass certifications, discovery, and motions and cross-motions for summary judgment — the parties in a rails-to-trails takings case in the Court of Federal Claims mediated the dispute and ended up agreeing to $110 million plus interest as just comp for the property taken, and slightly
Appellate decisions reversing a grant of summary judgment because there are disputed factual questions are not 100% satisfying. Yes, if you are the plaintiff/appellant, you live to fight another day instead of facing the exit door. But you haven’t won yet either, and the hard part — proving that you should win, and not merely
A case that we’ve been following with some mild amusement has reached the Hawaii Supreme Court, where it was argued last week.
Our amusement stems from the fact that shoreline and beachfront property in Hawaii — especially when that property is in the fabled “Gold Coast” of Waikiki at the foot of Diamond Head —
We know we’ve been doing the hard sell lately, with multiple posts on the details of the upcoming 2016 Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation / Condemnation 101 Conference, which runs from January 28-30, 2016, in Austin, Texas. And this will be our last pre-conference post, we promise.
But me and my co-planning chairs, Joe