Here, the ruling of the Massachusetts Superior Court (Suffolk County) in Matorin v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, No. 2084CV01334 (Aug. 26, 2020).
The short story is that the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction on the grounds that they were not likely to succeed on the merits of their as-applied regulatory takings
News just in: we’ve just received confirmation that the Conference will not be in-person in Scottsdale in January 2021, and we’re going online.
Not a big surprise, but still a bit disappointing, and it’s a shame that the circumstances won’t allow us to meet in-person to talk shop and to renew our friendships like we
Can there be a more “Kentucky” thing than the Kentucky Derby? We can’t think of one. Today’s case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, West v. Kentucky Horse Racing Comm’n, No. 19-6333 (Aug. 28, 2020) is about the litigation stemming from the disqualification by the racing stewards of the “horse
Tiffany Lashment’s “Ag Law in the Field” podcast is one of those you really should follow. Every episode is worthwhile in our opinion. The latest episode is a chat with Texas property owner lawyer Jim Spivey. From the show notes:
Eminent domain is one of the most popular topics we cover. Today, we are focusing on the important issue of compensation when property is being condemned. San Antonio-based attorney, Jim Spivey, joins us to talk us through many helpful concepts related to compensation, and offers important tips to Texas landowners dealing with eminent domain.
Check it out.
Continue Reading New Ag Law In The Field Podcast Ep: Jim Spivey On Eminent Domain & Just Compensation
A short while ago, we featured the cert petition in a case from the Big Island that we’ve been following as various pieces of it went up and down through both the state and federal court systems. See “New (Mike Berger) Cert Petition: ‘This case is the proverbial ‘Exhibit A’ of much that is
Property owners sued the State of Ohio Department of Transportation’s Director (in his official capacity) in federal court after ODOT’s highway project resulted in flooding of their land. They raised two claims: the first, a taking under the Fifth (and Fourteenth) Amendments, and the second a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The relief sought:
Reading through the Federal Circuit’s opinion in Christy, Inc. v. United States, No. 19-1738 (Aug. 24, 2020) (a case we’ve been following since its inception; see here for the complaint), doesn’t hold out a lot of hope for something new, because the Federal Circuit already ruled in Golden v. United States, 955
In Utah Dep’t of Transportation v. Coalt, Inc., No. 20161063 (Aug. 17, 2020), the Utah Supreme Court dealt with a public use and a just comp issue.
The first is perhaps the more interesting. After a federal court upheld environmentalists’ challenge to the Environmental Impact Statement prepared by UDOT for its Legacy Parkway Project
Although the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit declined to publish its opinion in Ostipow v. Federspiel, No. 18-2448 (Aug. 18, 2020), we wish it had for a couple of reasons.
First, the name: it just rolls off the tongue, melodiously. “Ostipow versus Federspiel.” We just like how that sounds. Second, the
