Photo of Robert H. Thomas

Robert H. Thomas

Our shut-in time has got us to thinking.

We’re all environmentalists now. This is the precautionary principle writ large. In a way, this is only part of a greater problem.

Welcome to the Twitterverse. We now have access to a vast amount of data — very often on a granular level — and this moves

The hits keep on coming. Here’s the latest complaint alleging that a coronavirus-related shut-down order is a taking (among other things).

This joins a long list (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here, for example) of complaints alleging takings. We’re guessing there’s

WMdoor2

This fall, we’ll be back at the William and Mary Law School (hopefully in-person, depending on the circumstances and the yet-to-be-announced approach to be taken by the College of William and Mary), teaching two of our favorite subjects.

Not only will this be the third time leading Eminent Domain and Property Rights (Law 608), but

In Allard v. Big Rivers Elec. Corp., No. 2019-CA-000486 (May 15, 2020), the Kentucky Court of Appeals made short work of each of the property owner’s arguments objecting to a taking of land for a electric-transmission corridor, and we won’t go through each contention here.

But that one that we will mention briefly

Texas Court of Appeals in Texas Central RR & Infrastructure, Inc. v. Miles, No. 13-19-000297 (May 7, 2020): sounds good.

We were going to write up this case, when Tiffany Dowell Lashmet (author of the fabulous Texas Agricultural Law Blog) posted her analysis: “Appellate Court Finds High-Speed Rail Meets Required Definitions for