Here’s the amicus brief, filed yesterday by Pacific Legal Foundation is support of the cert petition we filed last month which asks the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision of the Mississippi Supreme Court.
First, some background. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina destroyed “Toll Project No. 1,” the U.S. Highway 90 crossing of Bay St. Louis
There’s a lot of backstory in Reoforce, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-5084 (Mar. 17, 2017), involving mining claims, federal patents, and public lands. An interesting read, we won’t go into the details.
But suffice it to say that Reoforce thought it had a pretty decent chance of obtaining a patent for federal land
Here’s an article, recently published by the Urban Lawyer (the law review produced by our ABA section, the Section of State and Local Government Law), with our take on the most interesting and important eminent domain and takings rulings from the past year.
Many of the cases discussed will be familiar to regular
Today, in addition to listening to sessions on Ethics, jury presentations, and expert witnesses, we presented (along with Dave Breemer of Pacific Legal Foundation) a session on “Takings and the Police Power.” Here are the links to the cases and articles I discussed in my portion of the presentation:
Here are the links and references to the cases we spoke about today at our opening session on the national trends in eminent domain law at the 2017 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference in San Diego.
We again have a record attendance, and a good number of new attendees. If you aren’t
There have been a lot of takings and takings-related decisions coming out of the Court of Federal Claims lately, and we’ve held off on posting them individually. So to start off your New Year, here is a pop quiz.
Your task: guess whether the CFC held there was a taking, or no taking (answers below):
Following up on our post earlier this week with our amicus brief, here are the remainder of the briefs filed in the Federal Circuit in a case in which the government is asking the court to bypass panel hearing and go straight to en banc review of a Court of Federal Claims opinion which
When an opinion starts off like this, you just want to read the rest, even if the substance of the decision is about statutes of limitations:
This case arises from Mr. Abbas’s complaint against the United States (“U.S.” or “the Government”) in the Court of Federal Claims for an alleged taking of his property rights
Here’s what we’re reading today:
Here’s the follow up to that cert petition we recently posted. In Romanoff v. United States, 815 F.3d 809 (Fed. Cir. 2016), a rails-to-trails case, the Federal Circuit was confronted with a question about how New York property law treated an easement. In that case, the easement was granted for railroad purposes, and