You may recall that last October, we attended the first round of Supreme Court oral arguments in the Knick case with our William and Mary law class (Law 608: Eminent Domain and Property Rights).
And even though there’s not a takings case on the Court’s current docket, we figured that the Maui Clean
Yesterday’s Supreme Court arguments in what is known as the “DACA case” would normally not be something we’d cover on this blog. Yeah, the issue of whether the executive branch has the power to unwind (or, as the cert petition puts it to “wind down”) a prior administration’s executive actions is interesting and
Check this out. The Complaint that we’ve been meaning to post for a while, filed last month in a Los Angeles U.S. District Court, alleging that California’s new rent control laws are a taking, among other things.
Are rent control laws takings? Yes, pretty sure about that. But will courts conclude that they are takings?
Here’s the OA video (courtesy of the Michigan Supreme Court) from last week’s arguments in what we’re calling the “keep the change” case.
That’s the one where the government is arguing that after a property owner was late paying $8.00 in property taxes, the government is not only entitled to foreclose on the property, but
Check out this story by JD Morris (“PG&E renews push to avoid strict liability for 2017, 2018 fires“) in the San Francisco Chronicle, about the recent (and ongoing) California wildfires, and the issue of what has been called the “unusual,” “unique,” and “so-called” doctrine of inverse condemnation in that state’s courts.
Here’s the cert petition in a case we’ve been following since it was decided in the property owner’s favor by the Colorado Court of Appeals.
In Carousel Farms Metro. Dist. v. Woodcrest Homes, Inc., 444 P.3d 802 (Colo. App. 2017), the court invalidated an attempt to exercise eminent domain to take property which
We’re on the road early tomorrow for another visit to SCOTUS with our William and Mary Law School class. We hope to get in for the arguments in the Maui Clean Water Act case. Last year, we attended the first Knick arguments in October, and we wanted to repeat the experience for this year’s
We think the Connecticut Supreme Court’s opinion in Mayer-Whitman v. Zoning Board of Appeals, No. SC 19972 (Nov. 5, 2019) is worth a read, even if it does not break new ground, because it does a good job of explaining some basic principles.
Quick story: Breunich had a house. It didn’t conform to height
Registration underway, so come join us! Agenda full of hot topics in takings and appraisal law! The best national faculty! Renew friendships, and make new colleagues! And Nashville!
Download the brochure and make your plans for January. (Don’t wait, we’ve sold out the past three years.)
