Here’s a two-fer that covers very difficult and unsettled subjects in takings law: judicial takings and rent control.
In this cert petition, New York property owners assert that the New York Court of Appeals (the state’s highest court for those of you who do not watch Law & Order (dun-dun)), took private
We’re back again at that supposed distinction between the police power and the eminent domain power, which reminds us of that old tale about President Lyndon Johnson:
After reviewing a contingent of Viet Nam-bound Marines in California, Lyndon Johnson strode purposefully toward what he thought was his helicopter. “That’s your helicopter over there, sir,”
Here’s the other shoe that we’ve been waiting to drop.
Recall that in our last post on the pending Clean Water Act case (SCOTUS oral arguments scheduled for November 6, 2019 – yeah, as in one week from tomorrow), we suspected that a declaratory judgment action would be filed in a Hawaii state
With the ongoing wildfire dramas ongoing across California, several of you have asked us to collect the posts we have done about inverse condemnation liability in one place. So here you go:
Here’s the State of Hawaii’s response to an amicus brief we filed in a case that asks the Hawaii Supreme Court to resolve the question of what statute of limitations governs takings claims under the state constitution. We argued that constitutional claims such as these might not be subject to legislatively-imposed statutes of
These days, parts of California often looks more like a developing country than the world’s fifth most powerful economy. Urban encampments — complete with medieval diseases — have become legendary. The streets of its glittering cities of tech are paved not with gold, but with human waste (but there’s an app for that!).
We read the Nebraska Court of Appeals’ opinion in Russell v. Franklin County, No. A-18-827 (Oct. 15, 2019), twice, just to be sure we were understanding the holding and rationale correctly. Apparently we were: the court held that when the State (inadvertently) takes property — here, the County highway maintenance department entered the plaintiffs’
A short post today, since we’re butting up against a deadline, and are attending a conference most of the day (don’t you hate that when that happens?). But we have to share with you a recent Ipse Dixit podcast, which features property lawprof Lee Anne Fennell, talking about her recently-published book, which should be of
Update 10/25/2019: an astute and seasoned correspondent writes that the issue of whether a property owner must raise constitutional issues in the administrative proceedings was settled in a published opinion that involved the same agency, the California Coastal Commission. See Healing v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n (1994) 22 Cal. App. 4th 1158 (we put in in
There’s nothing terribly novel in the Texas Court of Appeals’ opinion in City of Houston v. The Commons at Lake Houston, Ltd., No. 14-18-00664-CV (Oct. 15, 2019), but we highlight it here for a couple of reasons.
First, the court’s holding that a regulatory takings claim was not ripe because the property owner