Following up on our post earlier this week with our amicus brief, here are the remainder of the briefs filed in the Federal Circuit in a case in which the government is asking the court to bypass panel hearing and go straight to en banc review of a Court of Federal Claims opinion which
What If The Government Gives A Takings Party, But Doesn’t Show Up?
We love Leo Rosten’s classic definition of chutzpah: “that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.” Mr. Rosten’s dictum stretches around the world — apparently even into its remote corners such as the Northern Marianas Islands.
Check
Fed Cir Amicus Brief: Regulatory v. Physical Takes In Rails-To-Trails – No En Banc Review To Overturn Settled Precedent
You rails-to-trails and takings mavens all know the drill in those cases: rail easement stops being used for rail, bikers and runners want a recreational path, the federal Surface Transportation Board issues a Notice of Interim Trail Use (they say “interim” because of the fiction that they are just “railbanking” and someday when we want
9th Cir: Restricting Voting To People Of Northern Marianas Descent Is Race-Based Voting Limitation
Here’s the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in a election law case we’ve been following, Davis v. Commonwealth Election Comm’n, No. 14-16090 (Dec. 27, 2016).
The issue in the case is whether limiting voting on certain constitutional amendments in the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands to a “person who is a citizen or national of the United
HAWSCT Considering Wipeout Regulatory Takings: What Is An Economically Beneficial Use?
Heads up for a case to watch being argued next week in the Hawaii Supreme Court.
This is a regulatory takings case that’s been up to the Hawaii appellate courts before (see here). In that opinion, the court of appeals correctly held that a property owner raising a regulatory takings case has no
Yule Log, Darth Vader Edition 2016
An inversecondemnation.com holiday tradition, the Yule Log, updated for current events.
Property Reserve Remand: You Get Discovery During Precondemnation Entry Proceedings
Like the Elizabethan gong farmer — whose job it was to police up the unpleasant remnants after the “main event” — the opinion of a court of appeal after a remand from the Supreme Court is often anticlimactic, and other than the parties involved no one really wants to see or hear about it too
South Dakota Takings Trilogy, Part III: Landowners’ Claim That Nearby Highway Project Impaired Access Was, Like, Their Opinion, Man
Schliem v. South Dakota, No. 27557 (Dec. 7, 2016) is the third in a series of condemnation cases issued earlier this month by the South Dakota Supreme Court. The first, South Dakota v. Miller, involved impairment of access resulting from a highway project suffered by an owner whose property was taken for the project.
Whaddaya Know, There Are Some Limits To Eminent Domain In Connecticut
Here’s one we’ve been waiting for.
In this post (“Sorry Not Sorry? Connecticut Supreme Court Has A Chance To Make Amends For Kelo“), we previewed the arguments and briefs in a case in which the court was considering whether the Transportation Commissioner’s power under Connecticut law to take “land, buildings, equipment or facilities”
Monday Reading: Raisin Redux, Beach Appeal Dismissal, Zoning, And More
Here’s what we’re reading today:
- From the Los Angeles Times, via Professor Kanner: “Those California raisins may be gone from the airwaves, but they’re still making waves in court” – after Horne, what’s next for the California raisin industry?
- Remember that case about who owns parts of North Carolina’s beaches, set for