This photo of the view from the lectern at the start of the day
proves we really were in the room and not distracted by all the distractions
possible in Las Vegas
Here are the materials and cases which I spoke about earlier today at the CLE International Eminent Domain Conference in Las Vegas. I had the lead off session on updates, and my talk focused on cases that I didn’t cover in the written materials:
- Colorado: Taking for public infrastructure use is not for a taking for a public purpose.
- Getting creative in right-to-take challenges in Texas: The Lazy W.
- Hawaii Supreme Court on looking behind the curtain in public use challenge: County of Hawaii v. C & J Coupe Family Ltd. P’ship.
- Proving pretext in public use challenges: lessons from First Amendment litigation: Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993).
- Georgia Supreme Court on the Pirate’s Code and the “strict construction” maxim.
- NC: Evidence Of Rental Income From A Billboard Is Admissible In Just Comp Trial.
- Hawaii Supreme Court on the “larger parcel” and “conditional deposit” issues (the parcels need not touch).
- Here’s the amicus brief we filed in the above case, which cites Baetjer v. United States, 143 F.2d 391, 395 (1st Cir.) (condemnation on island of Vieques caused severance damages to parcels on Puerto Rico), cert. denied, 323 U.S. 772 (1944).
- Colorado App Clarifies State Constitution’s “Damaging” Clause: Forcing A Neighbor To Provide Lateral Support Is Compensable.
- Virginia’s “Buyback” Statute Requires Owner Pay Premium After Condemnor Devalues Property.
- Fla App: Highest And Best Use Doesn’t Require Owner Have More Than “Conceptual Plans.”
- Oregon Supreme Court on “Fees on Fees.”
- We’ve Always Done it This Way: Brott v. United States and Article III judges and juries in federal inverse condemnation cases.
- The Staten Island case: owner proved it was reasonably likely that it would have proven a taking for preexisting wetlands regulations (and won a Penn Central case!).
- Maui beachfront case (would you pay $1 for the land?): Leone v. County of Maui and denial of “use,” or denial of “value.” Hawaii Adds To Lower Court Regulatory Takings Split: Is Leaving Land Vacant On The Hope It Is Worth More In The Future “Economically Beneficial Use”?
- Issues to watch: Inverse condemnation for wildfires and flooding.
My thanks to Autumn Waters and Darius Dynkowski for asking me to present this session.
The view in the other direction
(courtesy of fellow faculty member Anthony Della Pelle)
