This Sunday, February 16, 2025, will be the day, 192 years ago, when — a mere 5 days after oral arguments — the U.S. Supreme Court issued its (in)famous opinion in Barron ex rel. Tiernan v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243 (1833).
Generations of law students study this decision in
You remember when in grade school you learned that your teacher was out for the day, and you were getting a substitute? It could be a very good day, or a very not-so-good day. Maybe the sub was cool, and you end up watching filmstrips. But if you drew the short straw, the
A and B entered into a purchase and sale agreement for A to sell a commercial property (let’s call it “Blackacre”) to B, a commercial real estate developer.
A knew that the city planned to redevelop the area for a roundabout, “that would require the City to take over a portion of the property by
Nothing to do with the case, beyond the owner’s name.
But c’mon, its ABBA.
Ms. Money and her spouse own a home in San Marcos, Texas. That home is in a historic district.
But it turns out that some of that history isn’t pretty: one of the previous owners was “notoriously associated with the
We’ve long been fans of the Short Circuit podcast, a production of the Institute for Justice’s Judicial Engagement project. If you are not subscribed, you should be. It’s a great way to keep up on what is going on in the federal courts of appeals (ha, ha, now I get “short circuit”), with keen
Check out In re Condemnation of Property in Rem (Appeal of Clemens), No. 1101CD23 (Feb. 4, 2025), one from the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court.
The Town exercised eminent domain to take property, stating it was taking the land for public recreational purposes. That can’t be the Town’s true purpose, argued the landowner, because the Town
Our Pacific Legal Foundation colleague Ethan Blevins has published the lead article in the latest edition of the Wake Forest Journal of Law and Policy, and it is on a subject that makes it a must-read for you takings mavens.
The title says it all: “Penn Central in the States.” How do
Shands Key, with the City of Marathon in the background
This just in: in Shands v. City of Marathon, No. 3D21-1987 (Fed. 5, 2025), Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals sitting en banc held that the city’s downzoning of property (Shands Key, shown above in an exhibit from the Key West trial we participated
You know that from time to time — mostly thanks to our friend and colleague Shane Rayman and his firm — we cover property goings-on north of the border when a good property rights case comes before the Supreme Court of Canada (see here and here for past examples).
Well, here’s another one, this time
That was quick: no sooner are we all headed home from the just-wrapped 2025 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference in San Diego (report to follow soon), than Bobby Debelak posts up his report in the latest episode of the Eminent Domain Podcast –
Featuring Chris Clough, Angela Misch, Clint Schumacher, and Elizabeth