There’s not a whole lot in the U.S. Supreme Court’s order granting an injunction on appeal that suspends application of a part of New York State’s eviction moratorium until such time as a cert petition is filed. The claims in that case are due process claims regarding the deprivation of a hearing, not takings.
But
You’ve got big dreams, you want fame…
If so, here’s your chance: two (2!) Takings Maven Dream Jobs® are now available.
Pacific Legal Foundation requesting applications for positions as a Property Rights Constitutional Litigator. Job description includes “You will find and win the next important Supreme Court property rights case.”
The hits keep coming. There have already been complaints alleging takings against the feds for the CDC eviction moratorium, and against the State of California for its moratorium.
Now this, a complaint against the City of Angels alleging that its version of the moratorium works a taking, either a per se physical invasion taking, a
Here’s what we’re reading today. And this is one of those articles that you should not miss.
Our W&M colleague Katherine Mims Crocker has published “Reconsidering Section 1983’s Nonabrogation of Sovereign Immunity,” 73 Fla. L. Rev. 523 (2021).
Why is this a “must read” you ask? Because Professor Crocker concludes, “[t]he preceding Parts
According to that trustworthy source Wikipedia, in drama, the term deus ex machina (“God from the machine”) “is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence. Its function is generally to resolve an otherwise irresolvable plot situation, to surprise the
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s recent opinion in A Flock of Seagirls LLC v. Walton County, No. 20-12584 (Aug. 5, 2021) isn’t about judicial takings, or even about eminent domain (even though a straight condemnation turned up in the factual background).
But this blog’s frequently flyers might want to
We’re not entirely sure if this is “for real” or just an elaborate tongue-in-cheek spoof, but hey, there’s a website (“Give No Quarter!” and an invitation to “Become a Third Amendment lawyer”), a blog (“The Runt Piglet Squeals!”*), and the brief seems signed by an honest-to-goodness real lawyer and sure looks like it has a
A short one from the South Carolina Supreme Court. In Ray v. City of Rock Hill, No. 28045 (Aug. 4, 2021), the court held that the city’s re-connecting its pipe that had previously flooded Ray’s property qualified as the “affirmative, positive, aggressive act” required by S.C. law as an essential element of a new
Check out this recently-filed cert petition, which asks the Court to review a California Court of Appeal decision about exactions.
It’s a somewhat odd situation: the county issued a building permit, but conditioned it (yes, the county tried to put a condition in a ministerial building permit!) on the property owners recording a deed