According to this City Room blog post at the New York Times, Daniel Goldstein, the “last Atlantic Yards holdout” and the driving force behind Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, has agreed to cease his objections to the taking of his family home in return for $3 million. For a statement from Mr. Goldstein, see
Justice Stevens: No Friend Of Property Owners
You already know that Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Paul Stevens has announced his retirement from the Court. On that august occasion, we look back on his “takings” opinions.
One commentator, lawprof
8th Circuit: Rooker-Feldman Not Applicable, But Federal Claims Precluded Under San Remo
To paraphrase comedian Jeff Foxworthy, if you understand the title of this post…you might be a regulatory takings lawyer.
And when you hear the terms “Rooker–Feldman” and “San Remo,” you know you are knee deep in the often-bizarre procedural maze where a regulatory takings claim in federal court
8th Circuit: Federal Takings Lawsuit Not Ripe
In granting a special zoning exemption to Shelter House, Iowa City allowed it to build a homeless shelter on land next to Mr. and Mrs. Dahlen’s mobile home park. After losing their challenge to the zoning exemption, the Dahlens filed suit in federal court alleging the exemption violated their due process rights.
That claim was
Ninth Circuit To Hear Rent Control Takings Case En Banc
This just in: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will be hearing Guggenheim v. City of Goleta, No. 06-56306 (Sep. 28, 2009) en banc.
The panel opinion in Guggenheim held that the city’s mobile home rent control ordinance was a regulatory taking, an issue the court had never considered before:
11th Circuit: County Reasonably Concluded Something Might Be Going On In The Champagne Room
Contradicting Chris Rock’s dictum (caution, may be very offensive), Fulton County, Georgia concluded there might be something untoward going on in the Champagne Room, at least in those serving alcohol. In Flanigan’s Enterprises, Inc. of Ga. v. Fulton County, No. 08-17035 (Feb. 16, 2010), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held
Connecticut Supreme Court: An Option To Purchase Is Not “Property,” So Optionee Can Be Abused
The Connecticut Supreme Court has issued opinions in a trio of closely-watched eminent domain cases. The first two opinions deal with technicalities of eminent domain law, but the third overturns a $12 million jury verdict that the Town of Branford, Connecticut abused its eminent domain power.
In Town of Branford v. Santa Barbara, SC
Eagle On Regulatory Takings (4th ed. 2009)
I just received my copy of the latest edition of Professor Steven J. Eagle‘s definitive treatise Regulatory Takings (Lexis/Nexis, 4th ed. Dec. 2009).
Like the earlier editions, this is a must-have for every land use and property law attorney’s back bookshelf.
Chapters include “Property Rights and Their Sources,” “The Ascendancyof Land Use Regulation,” “Analytical
Motions For Reconsideration In ICA Accretion Taking Appeal
Both parties have asked the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals to take another look at its opinion in Maunalua Bay Beach Ohana 28 v. State of Hawaii, No. 28175 (Dec. 30, 2009).
In that case, the court held (1) the Hawaii Legislature took existing littoral accretion when it assigned ownership of the accretion from
Government Brief: Landowner Must Seek To Change Land Use Designations To Ripen Federal Takings Claim
The County of Maui has filed its Answering Brief in Leone v. County of Maui, No. 29696, an appeal in the HawaiiIntermediate Court of Appeals which is considering, among other issues,the question of when a regulatory takings claim is ripe for reviewunder Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City