Here’s one that every Hawaii civil practitioner, trial and appellate, should read. It’s only a few pages, but it’s very important.
It is a pillar of the appeals process that in the usual case, the lower court’s judgment must be final — resolving all claims by all parties against all other parties — before the
If you “get” this headline and the decision by the Federal Circuit, then congratulations, you are a super takings nerd. King of the Nerds. Off-the-charts nerd. Your takings law geek certificate is in the mail.
In Petro-Hunt, LLC v. United States, No. 16-1981 (July 13, 2017), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
An unpublished opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in a pipeline case from Virginia. But even though it is not precedent, we’re covering it anyway because it raises important issues.
In Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. 76 Acres, No. 15-2547 (July 13, 2017), Columbia possessed the delegated power
Check it out: Clint Schumacher’s latest Eminent Domain Podcast, with guest Professor Ilya Somin on Murr v. Wisconsin.
We’ll just leave this right here. Dr. Zaius could not be reached for comment.
In Palmer v. Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, No. 1160630 (July 13, 2017), the Virginia Supreme Court concluded that an out-of-state natural gas company has the power under Virginia’s “entry statute” to enter private property to conduct surveys to determine if the land is suitable for condemnation for a pipeline.
When a property
Now that the dust has settled somewhat, for your weekend reading, here are your links to some of the vast amount of commentary which the Murr v. Wisconsin decision has thus far generated:
The Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, apparently has a problem of unregulated cemeteries. Who knew?
So it did what local government do when they think they have a problem, it passed a law. That law, Ordinance 12-12-20-001, required owners of all cemeteries, public or private, to maintain them. The ordinance also contained two troublesome provisions.
Winter storms damaged a seawall which protected a blufftop, oceanfront home. The owners, not surprisingly, wanted to rebuild the wall to protect their home. The Coastal Commission, as is its wont, saw this as an opportunity to extract some goodies from the owners. So it granted a limited-term permit to rebuild the wall, conditioned on
Here are links to the cases and materials we spoke about today during our portions of the APA’s 2017 Planning Law Review webinar: