Here’s one, just issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
We’ll let you read the opinion in Chmielewski v. City of St. Pete Beach, No. 16-16402 (May 16, 2018), for the full story, but to get you started, here’s the summary: the court affirmed a jury verdict in favor of
You might not think that the conclusion which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reached in M.A.K. Investment Group, LLC v. City of Glendale, No. 16-1492 (May 14, 2018) would be all that controversial: when private property is declared by a municipality to be “blighted” and subject to redevelopment (and eminent
Here’s what we’re reading today:
We’re in Detroit the rest of the week at the Mercy Law School for the venerable Land Use Institute, now in its 32nd iteration.
Planning Chair Frank Schnidman has assembled a great faculty including out Detroit colleague Alan Ackerman (above, talking about takings liability for flooding), and we’ll be spending the time talking inverse
Here is the video of last Friday’s oral arguments in a case we’ve been following, in which the owners of a mobile home park successfully challenged a California municipality’s rent control ordinance as a taking.
In Colony Cover Properties v. City of Carson, a U.S. District Court for the Central District of California jury
We’re on our third day at the 2018 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Conference in Charleston, SC, and as usual, we’re having our headline presentations by takings guru Michael Berger (pictured above), who is updating us on the most interesting and important cases of the past year, and Jim Burling, who will
In Cappel v. Nebraska Dep’t of Natural Resources, No. S-16-1037 (Dec. 22, 2017), the Nebraska Supreme Court concluded the Department’s notices to Cappel pursuant to an interstate water compact which closed off his land’s ability to draw surface water from the Republican River for irrigating his crops was neither a physical nor regulatory taking.
This photo of the view from the lectern at the start of the day
proves we really were in the room and not distracted by all the distractions
possible in Las Vegas
Here are the materials and cases which I spoke about earlier today at the CLE International Eminent Domain Conference in Las Vegas. I
The title of West Virginia Lottery v. A-1 Amusement, Inc., No. 16-1047 (Nov. 13, 2017) alone may not give you an indication that this is a takings case, but yes, it’s a takings case.
As the title might indicate, it’s a case involving the state-run lottery and video lottery machines. If we’re reading
The Georgia Supreme Court’s analysis in Diversified Holdings, LLP v. City of Suwanee, No. S17A1140 (Nov. 2, 2017) reminded us of that old trope from logic, “no true Scotsman.”
According to a completely reliable source (Wikipedia):
No true Scotsman is a kind of informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a