A short (but interesting) one from the Ohio Supreme Court. In State ex rel. Balunek v. Marchbanks, No. 2021-1469 (July 25, 2023), the court held that a physical takings claim alleging the DOT cut off access to property was ripe, even though the owner might have applied for permit to gain access.
As part
Here’s what we’re reading today:
The city told an owner whose three parcels were outside of the city’s jurisdiction that if it wanted the city’s permission to replat into 74 parcels, it would need city water and sewer service to each of the proposed lots.
So the owner asked to connect to the city’s water and sewer system (deliberately overbuilt
Here’s a recently-published article (ALI-CLE’s The Practical Real Estate Lawyer) on a subject that we know you will want to read about: Jon Houghton, Hertha Lund, and Ben Stormes, Application of the Penn Central Test, 7 Prac. Real Estate Lawyer 7 (May 2023).
Check it out. It’s short, practical (naturally), and
The latest in a case we’ve been following doesn’t get to the substantive issue: is a local park district authorized to take private property for a bike path when the statute authorizes takings for “conservation of natural resources?”
Instead, the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for a familiar reason: lack of a final judgment.
Join us in Denver in a few weeks at the American Bar Association Annual Meeting where our section, the Section of State and Local Government Law, will be presenting the Jefferson Fordham Awards.
The Jefferson B. Fordham Awards, the highest honors given by the ABA Section of State and Local Government Law
The Mahon Property
Join us on Friday, August 4, 2023 (10:30-11:30am, MT) in Denver at the ABA Annual Meeting for our CLE session on “The 100th Anniversary of Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon: How the Takings Clause Became the Primary Check on Government Power When SCOTUS Abandoned Review Under the Due Process and Contracts Clauses
When a condemnor is told “no” (or voluntarily drops an eminent domain lawsuit), many jurisdictions require it to pay attorney fees to the parties on the target end of the vs.
Colorado is one of those jurisdictions, and as the Colorado Court of Appeals noted in Mulberry Frontage Metro. Dist. v. Sunstate Equip. Co.
A big thanks to friend and colleague Paul Henry for bringing to our attention this article by Andrew Stuttaford, UFOs and Eminent Domain.
No, it (unfortunately) is not the latest tenure-making scholarly law journal article (but we can dream, can’t we?), but a piece in National Review.
It details a proposal to release
Every law school graduate surely remembers that 1L Contracts case about the two ships named “Peerless” and the doctrine of mutual mistake.
In Marchbanks v. Ice House Ventures, LLC, No. 2022-0047 (June 8, 2023), the Ohio Supreme Court rejected the DOT’s claim that a previously-agreed-upon agreement to settle an eminent domain action did not