A law journal article worth reading (short, not too many distracting footnotes) on takings theory.
In Imperfect Takings, 46 Fordham Urban Law Journal 130 (2019), Professor Shai Stern writes about what he calls the “three safeguards” in eminent domain (due process, public use, and mandatory compensation), and how to evaluate the legality of takings
As part of a federally-funded highway project, the WV DOT took a portion of parcels belonging to several property owners. The partial takings ended up landlocking one tract. So the DOT proposed building an access road to that parcel. The owners didn’t think this was the best idea, because “maintaining a road in that area
The Arizona Corporations Commission has authority to regulate the sale, lease, assigning, mortgage of a public utility’s assets, including when those assets are “otherwise dispose[d] of.” These transactions need the Commission’s approval.
The city intended to exercise eminent domain to take the assets of a water utility. This sure looked like a “friendly” condemnation: the
We’re not quite sure what to make of this story (“The Raisin Situation“) in the New York Times, about the situation in Fresno, California, after the Horne case. You remember that one, don’t you? All about whether USDA’s seizure of raisins in order to maintain the price was a taking.
The piece
Nothing really can be done: the harsh reality is that CAFO’s (concentrated animal feeding operations) stink. But many state legislatures have concluded that farming and ranching are so important that the consequences (“externalities”) that naturally occur have to be accepted.
Right to Farm Acts, Indiana’s included, generally deprive neighboring property owners of their
Thanks to Professor Michael Wara’s Twitter feed, here is what might possibly be the first and only example of a comic strip devoted to inverse condemnation.
Yes, it is on an advocacy site (the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245), and it doesn’t really go into the details of the doctrine
Here’s the Brief in Opposition, in Like v. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co., LLC, No. 18-1206 (Apr. 17, 2019), the case which we’ve been following (and in which we filed this amici brief).
This is the case in which landowners are challenging the district court’s issuance of an injunction in a Natural
Here are the links from today’s two sessions (the first, federal water issues impacting local land use; the second, Bringing and Defending a Takings Case):
Here’s the amici brief of the Owners’ Counsel of AmericaNew Jersey, Virginia, and West Virginia property owners; Cato Institute, and NFIB Small Business Legal Center which urges the Supreme Court to grant cert in a case we’ve been following for a while.
As regular readers understand, several federal courts of appeals
We recommend you pick up the opinion of Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court in Ross v. Acadian Seaplants, Ltd., No. Was-17-142 (Mar. 28, 2019), because it deals with property rights in an area subject to the public trust. We think the court did a pretty good job of setting out the competing claims and