We would not have guessed back in March when we posted the “first” coronavirus shut down takings complaint that we’d still be at it at the end of 2020, but here we are.
The latest is this complaint filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon against Oregon’s governor (in
We’re taking a slight detour today from our usual fare, to cover a case in which we represented the petitioner that involves effective assistance of counsel. Appellate counsel. It’s a post-conviction relief case and not takings, but if you are interested in appellate practice, read on.
In Villados v. State of Hawaii, No. SCWC-15-0000111
Each spring, we do a smaller course at the William and Mary Law School (known as a “Directed Reading”) that focuses on some interesting property issue. The class reads a book and uses it as a springboard for discussion.
No exam, no paper, just an exploration of the issues as a way about thinking about
Join us next Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 3pm ET (12 noon Pacific) for the free webinar “Shutdowns, Closures, Moratoria, and Bans,” produced by Pacific Legal Foundation and Owners’ Counsel of America.
Along with my colleagues Leslie Fields (Executive Director, OCA), and Jim Burling (PLF), I’ll be talking about the legal foundations for
In case you missed any part of it: the recordings of the recent 2020 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference are now available.
Go here for the descriptions of the panels, speakers, and links to the recorded sessions.
This year’s conference, held on October 1-2, opened with the Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Prize being awarded to Professor
After Knick knocked out the “state procedures” requirement of the Williamson County ripeness doctrine, we predicted that owners’ lawyers better dust off their Federal Courts treatises that have been sitting on our bookshelves for the last three decades.
We said that because we suspected the game was still afoot, and Knick alone would not overcome
Come join us for the book party for Professor David Callies’ recently published (by the ABA State and Local Government Law Section) book, “Regulatory Takings After Knick.”
We’re online (of course), so you don’t have to come to Honolulu – we’re on Zoom:
Date: Thursday, October 29, 2020
Time: 4-5pm Hawaii Time
RSVP: No
We all know that despite the heightened Twombly/Iqbal federal pleadings standard, that it doesn’t mean a whole lot if a complaint survives a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. All this means that the court thinks it is plausible that the complaint states a claim. And that the plaintiff gets to keep going. That’s it.
Check this out, a recent case on the Uniform Relocation Act from the Ohio Supreme Court. Does it conflict with a decision that goes the other way from the West Virginia Supreme Court, or is it consistent with a South Dakota decision (cert. denied in that one, by the way)? Read on and find
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following. In this Order, the Ninth Circuit denied rehearing and rehearing en banc of the 2-1 panel decision in Pakdel v. City & County of San Francisco, No. 17-17504 (9th Cir. Mar. 17, 2020).
Earlier, the panel concluded that a regulatory takings case was