Update 2: more commentary here.
Update 1: Two quotes worth noting:
“Scalia joked in summarizing the decision from the bench that the Sacketts were surprised by the EPA decision that their land contained navigable waters of the United States ‘having never seen a ship or other vessel cross their yard.”” Oh Justice Scalia: you
In City of Dallas v. Stewart, No. 09-0257 (Jan. 27, 2012), the Texas Supreme Court provided a good reminder of the importance of property rights and due process, even when protecting rights may inconvenience the government. In that case, the court held that a determination by a city agency that a home was a
Under California law, there’s a short statute of limitations (technically, it’s a “statute of repose” but who’s quibbling) for challenges to local government zoning decisions. The statute requires that a challenge must be filed within 90 days to “attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of a legislative body to adopt or amend
At yesterday’s Hawaii Water Law Conference, several presenters discussed what is known as the “East Maui water case” (that is easier to say than “In re Petition to Amend Interim Instream Flow Standards for Waikamoi, Puohokamoa, Haipuaena, Punalau/Kolea, Honomanu, West Wailuaiki, East Wailuaiki, Kopiliula, Puakaa, Waiohue, Paakea, Kapaula, and Hanawi streams“), which
Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Sackett v. EPA, No. 10-1062 (transcript here). We were going to write up our thoughts, but minds immeasurably better than ours beat us to it. Concensus seems to be that the EPA is going to get smacked, but we can’t tell yet how hard. Our
There is still time to join us for the upcoming Hawaii Water Law conference, to be held in Honolulu on January 11, 2012. I am the planning co-chair along with Jesse Souki, Director of the State of Hawaii Office of Planning.
In addition to Jesse and me, we’ve assembled a diverse and talented
Once again, our old friend and colleague Paul Schwind is following an interesting ongoing case. We’ve been tracking the “Bridge Aina Le`a” litigation, but have not had the time to digest the latest developments in a comprehensive fashion and Paul attended the recent federal court hearing in the federal phase, and has kindly provided
Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in PPL Montana v. Montana, No. 10-218 (cert. granted June 20, 2011), a case in which the Montana Supreme Court disregarded 100 years of private or federal ownership of the riverbeds under more than 500 miles of river, and held that the state owned them.
For those who tuned in to today’s webinar Eminent Domain: Redevelopment Challenges for Local Government, here are the cases I spoke about during my session:
The EPA has filed its merits brief in Sackett v. EPA, No. 10-1062, the case in which Idaho property owners are asserting their right to challenge the agency’s assertion via a “compliance order” that a portion of their land are “wetlands” and that they violated the Clean Water Act.
The EPA’s brief asserts that