Here’s the long story short in Metropolitan Theater, LLC v. YES Prep Public Schools, Inc, No. 01-15-00480 (Feb. 25, 2016), a decision from the Texas Court of Appeals:
The theater sued “YES Prep Public Schools” because (allegedly), the school screwed up the theater’s agreement to buy a parcel of land from a third party.
As we noted here (“Latest On The Latest Hawaii Takings Case: Unconstitutional Conditions, Statutes Of Limitations, And Vested Rights“) the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii is considering a regulatory takings case (removed by the defendant State of Hawaii from Hawaii courts) involving a stalled development on the Big Island.
At
You can really breathe in San Jose
They’ve got a lot of space
There’ll be a place where I can stay.
I was born and raised in San Jose
I’m going back to find some peace of mind in San Jose
Today, in this order after a series of rescheduled considerations that had seen the
Here’s what we’re reading today, two pieces on seemingly unrelated topics:
Colorado’s Constitution prohibits the use of proceeds from the state lottery, which are used to fund the “Great Outdoor Colorado Program” Trust Fund from being “used to acquire real property by condemnation through the power of eminent domain.” Colo. Const. art. XXVII, § 9.
The Town of Silverthorne used trust fund money on a recreational trail project
Worth couldn’t get to his “Section 30 property” except from Evans’ land, or from his own land after fording the 102 River.
So Worth sued Evans in a private condemnation (essentially seeking an easement by necessity). Evans filed a petition alleging that Worth could not use the eminent domain power because Worth had reasonable access
Let’s say that you didn’t know much about regulatory takings, or municipal employment and Fair Labor Standards law (in our case, the latter would most certainly be correct). And let’s say you were asked to predict how the plaintiff would fare with a claim that the city’s regulatory regime for taxicabs was so oppressive that
Appropos of nothing really, but we’re going to end this work week by recounting for you something we heard during testimony yesterday at a government agency hearing. You land use types will recognize this one, but we think this took the “unilateral agreement” fiction to new heights:
“We couldn’t reach agreement with [the other party] so
All of the drama playing out in the North Carolina Supreme Court yesterday as the court heard oral arguments in its review of Kirby v North Carolina Dep’t of Transportation, No. COA14-184 (Feb. 17, 2015) came down — as they often do in these things — to a single question from the bench, and
A pretty straightforward one from the Mississippi Supreme Court. Mississippi Transportation Comm’n v. United Assets, LLC, No. 2014-SA-01181-SCT (Feb. 11, 2016), involved a partial taking by MDOT at the intersection of I-59 and Highway 42.
The state’s appraiser concluded that commercial development was the highest and best use of the land and settled on