42 U.S.C. § 1983 | Civil Rights

Well, no sooner had we hit “publish” on our last post (which ended with, “let’s wait for the transcript”), that the court reporter posted the transcript. Whoa, fast.

Read and analyze away, friends!

Transcript, Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647 (U.S. Jan. 16, 2019)

0116190650b_HDR

As Professor Gideon Kanner likes to remind us, eminent domain has been characterized as “the dark corner of the law.” We thought back to that phrase when we joined the queue outside of the Supreme Court this very dark (and very cold) morning, for the rehearing in the Knick v. Township of Scott case

It wasn’t going to be too hard to figure out what the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit was going to do in Lumbard v. City of Ann Arbor, No. 18-1258 (Jan. 10, 2018). After all, the case involved a federal takings claim in federal court, which the district court dismissed because

Our final 2018 post focused on what we thought was the biggest case of that year, and which, we’re predicting, will be the biggest case of 2019: Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647, that’s the one in which the Supreme Court is considering whether federal takings claims can be brought in federal court

We’re going to end 2018 with the latest in what we think was the most important issue of the past year (and which, we predict, will be the most important case in takings law for at least a decade when it likely gets decided in 2019), Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647.

That

1126181629e_HDR

We’re almost there, but we still have room remaining. At the 2018 Conference in Charleston, we both sold out the registrations and the conference hotel, so we planned ahead for the upcoming 2019 Conference in Palm Springs at the Renaissance Palm Springs Resort

Register here. You will also be able to download

Here’s the final brief for Ms. Knick, replying to the Township’s and the Solicitor General’s supplemental letter briefs.

It’s very short, so you should read it yourself. But here’s what we think is the highlight:

Williamson County is irreconcilable with the traditional view that a Takings Clause claim accrues (and is actionable in federal court)

Here’s the third (and final) supplemental letter brief in Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647 (which is set for reargument before the Supreme Court next month).

Of course, you should not be surprised that the Township disagrees with both Ms. Knick’s arguments, as well as the SG’s supplemental brief, and